Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
City Council Meeting - Council - Agenda - 02/21/2012
CITY OF KENT ����J ii/i iIJ✓/r >/ r rah' l/r % /��//; City Council Meeting Agenda �. February 21 , 2012 Mayor Suzette Cooke Dennis Higgins, Council President Councilmembers Elizabeth Albertson m Bill Boyce Jamie Perry x Dana Ralph u Deborah Ranniger we Les Thomas CIFY CLERK u �' KENT CITY COUNCIL AGENDAS KENT February 21, 2012 W>_HI. �N Council Chambers MAYOR: Suzette Cooke COUNCILMEMBERS: Dennis Higgins, President Elizabeth Albertson Bill Boyce Jamie Perry Dana Ralph Deborah Ranniger Les Thomas ********************************************************************** COUNCIL WORKSHOP AGENDA 5:30 p.m. Item Description Speaker Time 1. Government Relations/Legislative Update Michelle Wilmot 10 minutes (PIC-Medical Cannabis) 2. Federal Legislative Update Ben McMakin 30 minutes 3. Port of Seattle Commission Presentation Port Commissioner 20 minutes ********************************************************************** COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA 7:00 p.m. 1. CALL TO ORDER/FLAG SALUTE 2. ROLL CALL 3. CHANGES TO AGENDA A. FROM COUNCIL, ADMINISTRATION, OR STAFF B. FROM THE PUBLIC - Citizens may request that an item be added to the agenda at this time. Please stand or raise your hand to be recognized by the Mayor. 4. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS A. Public Recognition B. Community Events C. Introduction of Appointees D. Rotary International Proclamation 5. PUBLIC HEARINGS 6. PUBLIC COMMENT 7. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Minutes of Previous Meeting and Workshop - Approve B. Payment of Bills - None C. Excused Absence for Councilmember Ranniger - Approve D. Bicycle Advisory Board Appointment - Confirm E. Lodging Tax Advisory Committee Appointment - Confirm F. Write-offs of Uncollectible Accounts - Authorize G. Washington Association of Sheriffs and Police Chiefs Grant - Accept (Continued) COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA CONTINUED H. Amend Kent City Code Section 9.39 - Towing Ordinance — Adopt I. Day Wireless Systems Contract for VHF Radio Antenna System — Authorize J. Geo Engineers Contract for Guiberson Reservoir — Authorize K. J A Brennan Associates, PLLC, Contract — Levee Wall Aesthetics Design and Irrigation Design Boeing Levee — Authorize L. GEI Contract for Briscoe Desimone — Authorize M. PACE Engineers Contract for James Street Pump Station Upgrades — Authorize N. AECOM Technical Services, Inc., Contract for Horseshoe Bend Retaining Walls Structural Engineering — Authorize O. Proposed Local Improvement District, SE 256th Street — Authorize P. Washington Recreation and Conservation Office Grant, Downey Farmstead Restoration Project — Accept Q. North Park Storm Drainage — Accept as Complete S. OTHER BUSINESS 9. BIDS A. Horseshoe Bend and Upper Russell Road Restoration Planting 10. REPORTS FROM STANDING COMMITTEES, STAFF AND SPECIAL COMMITTEES 11. EXECUTIVE SESSION AND ACTION AFTER EXECUTIVE SESSION 12. ADJOURNMENT NOTE: A copy of the full agenda packet is available for perusal in the City Clerk's Office and the Kent Regional Library. The Agenda Summary page and complete packet are on the City of Kent web site at www.KentWa.gov An explanation of the agenda format is given on the back of this page. Any person requiring a disability accommodation should contact the City Clerk's Office in advance at (253) 856-5725. For TDD relay service call the Washington Telecommunications Relay Service at 1-800-833-6388. m m O W W Ot O T v U C_ - N y O O T C J W i3 Ot y 10 C m J 0 J V V m m ._ O C m v i N O a m m �O J V U C m a m W Cyo- m o m a'Ci V Q m m i U N m 0 L > ` O w y T T p W �n F O O W �n '/� p C L y O a L Y vwi N E c O u N U W V m 0 a- wC Y , 9 a p w y C V w U J m W U m W - O O W C = T _ N o ra o V C C i m C m o E w 0 u m m 0 �_ C OV OI; OI� � JUCw WL LLJwmC mJ0 m ml C Q m J O C O w i O ` C O J W W Ti T Ot V L O 0- V L OI O m a T 0 E m O L D `OI ` C J J `N W �n T J Q m V O'U C Y O L >_ % V y >' w C �n W C W O O a1 y y 3 w '�-� W • m W /� 10 y m y O T w w C N 10 VJi W v C O T J v Vp V¢I • a w C d N o c m y y E w y � E o > W w °. a wEJu N•L ,� m O pM I us 'm D ' J cc � a � E � � W -o WE '- J Em v . ram ram • -o J W r m w =on w m -O E � n � na � L E D J o - a U L 0 O J a J o = .w, o. J m J m O t ,m, '^ £ o QV Off; 3mav, v, m 3 ._ aaaL ay .. =0190 UE _ T w W o V w '^ > p V' i w w > W � � w W � Vm iy m � J y - L V W L O L L O C m 0 m F m y i 0 = 0 w O C C 10 d t V C W y j 0 9 U wig y y y C m O T C1 - C Ot W V E C ._ a y O V J a 0 Q m C q a C ra m m W 'V C U m C O O E D M U � C O O L J E E °' _ Y O 'C w = v V 3i O m � C N J E YJ E 0 .VOV Cot� JC WC W vwi V -OO m EYm K .G a a t w a C C V -o E O- O _ W '- W C W U V N m N W V L m J N C E0 Z o ` > E w V w .L, 3 E '° o � Uo10 V VVwo , W ° w � wovomv � W f mom � � .�' mE TEE LOST m T •i J % w m v E y v V i o y W E 0�-0 d ra m a C _ m W 01 m w y C N N N . y U o w W W W W O V U f O = V N t 0 vl - a m E a L S U O >> > U V y f m O y w C > E 0 w Ifl m C E V a F � Z v o m o o H '^ 3 y p o 10 '° mFw E C F N J C U o m ra m - L N ,� o V C W L a f w L C w L w v i OV Z w C o A W m ^C v T m F W C W w m w � O E E -°o 0 w f w one ago W N J w M ? O La Ut U� v -o .. W`M 3 0 W Y ?i U W E m y m O E �_ L w m U i W 'O _ C w J U C C 0 ?r W E O T m a U E 01 VVi 0 E C w C W N T C m L O3 L m o N J L C U y a 3 = C W m 0 J O W i J J W W J m • m W N y, F W >_ E ,� a U - E - u u V o u M Ydti mL ui� CdLN Vl mN 3 mti a m w m F w " = a a" a ._ ._ a V V C C O V m C ra w ? W V E E v C � o w y. 0 C v O Y1 u m u m F a 3 o Q F v V m m o OU V ° m n $ $ w V > £ OU O �° � a Q w � W 02: a Q2: a Q2: v p O G` O > ^ L •zr E L n o ca > i3 V N Q N O w L • C C ` aSi a J a O F O N r� 0, C �r0j (n 3 O p WN VNT f= zmW U1 Ln wIN C � CV W O C O W N O O irz 0W M ` m > M _ Mr. QTiCw Q aU J i0 C V i0 Z V C t G 1N V V 3 V m 0 `0 W o C N m v O C O C M M m OU Y .ram `mU Q 3 YrvY V N N E LU W r U1 C m O N AO J W '0 y W Ot V O Ot E a 0 i O W C y 1 L (j , - M T C O U � -o � � M 3 L � 3 .1T ,v`c ww Um scow a ra m T 3 LD wapi U C m J m N v v J_ 0 W J v O O 3 O b W O > v C G y • U m T U E :u T J a W y) O i 0 U pU W m LL j T C C 0 w J T w w o Q C w m U V U O - i T 0 W N C O a 3 K O j U VI C 0 L O vpi W j W W q 0 IT a 3 U > > m Y w Y 0, C C H m Wm 3 co E W ° {/1 m 3 a W ° "vav air `Or u''9i � `m -mo 3o-o oo � °�' � ni w G C G E wv COOw Z m O1i L m W O Orz Wt W C i a W N � O�O. O V a H j W � m .� ra w D r Y Q u N o O L v A E m 0 •Y T 3 m G �. w w w u O ` v 0 O. L N FLU U +' W W '� UZW >- C , u , - Vl v O a� 6 a K in V m Q V > 4 a QF � m0 Q mU �, l_ ti COUNCIL WORKSHOP 1) Government Relations/Legislative Update 2) Federal Legislative Update 3) Port of Seattle Commission Presentation CHANGES TO THE AGENDA Citizens wishing to address the Council will, at this time, make known the subject of interest, so all may be properly heard. A) From Council, Administration, or Staff B) From the Public PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS A) Public Recognition B) Community Events C) Introduction of Appointees D) Rotary International Proclamation PUBLIC COMMENT Agenda Item: Consent Calendar 7A - 7B CONSENT CALENDAR 7. City Council Action: Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds to approve Consent Calendar Items A through Q. Discussion Action 7A. Approval of Minutes. Approval of the minutes of the workshop and regular Council meeting of February 7, 2012. 7B. Approval of Bills. Bills were not available for approval. y RCN i Kent City Council Meeting Was„ „ ,., February 7, 2012 The regular meeting of the Kent City Council was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mayor Cooke. Councilmembers present: Albertson, Boyce, Higgins, Perry, Ranniger, and Thomas. Council member Ralph was excused from the meeting. (CFN-198) CHANGES TO THE AGENDA A. From Council, Administration, Staff. (CFN-198) CAO Hodgson noted that substitute contracts with ICI Jones Chemical and Cascade Columbia for water treat- ment chemicals (Consent Calendar Items G & H) have been provided, added Riverbend Golf Course Netting as Other Business Item A, and added Labor Contract to the Executive Session. (CFN-118) Hodgson also announced that a process and timeline regarding use of the former Kent Resource Center for the homeless will be presented at the Parks and Human Services Committee meeting on February 16. He noted that committee meetings are work sessions, and that the Committee Chair determines whether public input will be taken. B. From the Public. (CFN-198) Nothing was added by the public. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS A. Public Recoanition. (CFN-198) Mayor Cooke and Council President Higgins commended City staff for their work during the recent snow and ice storm. B. Community Events. (CFN-198) Higgins announced events taking place at ShoWare and Ranniger announced Parks events. Mayor Cooke introduced Nancy Simpson who noted that the World's Fair in Seattle took place 50 years ago, and asked anyone who has memories or memorabilia from the Fair to contact her at the Kent Historical Society. C. Introduction of Appointees. (CFN-198) Mayor Cooke introduced Jennifer Dye, her appointee to the Arts Commission, and Dye spoke about her interest in serving on the Commission. Mayor Cooke announced that Wendy Johnson, who was not in attendance, is her other appointee to the Arts Commission. D. Community Arts Support Funding Recipients. (CFN-118) Ronda Billerbeck introduced the following winners of Community Arts Support Funding, and Mayor Cooke presented each with a certificate: Rainier Youth Choir, Rainier Chorale, Kent Senior Activity Center, South King County Music Teachers Association, At the Ridge Theatre, and Icon Theatre. E. Amateur Softball Association Award. (CFN-118) Parks Director Watling introduced Parks Department tournament hosts Brian Saw and Dave Heldt. Mike Rabun of the Amateur Softball Association explained their requirements for a tournament, and commended City staff on their professionalism. He then presented the James Farrell Award to the Mayor Cooke. 1 Kent City Council Minutes February 7, 2012 F. Kent Downtown Partnership Presentation. (CFN-462) Barbara Smith, Executive Director, displayed the new Kent Downtown Partnership logo and reported on recent developments, including a new website. PUBLIC COMMENT A. Chamber of Commerce Government Affairs. (CFN-825) Andrea Keikkala, Executive Director of the Kent Chamber of Commerce, gave an update on issues they have been working with legislators on, including streamlined sales tax mitigation policy and the annexation sales tax credit. B. KentHOPE. (CFN-118) Leslie K. Hamada, 28026 189th Avenue SE, Kent, provided a proposal to operate a homelessness center in the former Kent Parks Resource Center. She acknowledged that the City will give a report at the Parks Committee meeting on February 16, and asked the Council to take action. Carol Nelson, 11441 SE 196th Street, Kent, spoke about the benefits of meeting the marginalized. Chris Gough of the Seattle's Union Gospel Mission, 1958 Union Avenue North, Seattle, stated that the need in Kent is urgent and is greater than in other cities in the area. He said although they feel the location is good, they have not had an opportunity to get inside the building to see if it is viable. Albertson emphasized the need to act soon and upon her question, Gough said someone from the Union Gospel Mission would be available for a tour of the facility next week. Mayor Cooke said staff will work with Mr. Gough. Dave Mitchell, 14516 SE 266th Street, Kent, said although he respects the City's process, the need is urgent and asked the Council to move quickly. Davis Nichols, 14411 SE 183rd Street, Renton, thanked the Council for listening with respect and sympathy two weeks ago, and encouraged them to move forward on this issue. CONSENT CALENDAR Higgins moved to approve Consent Calendar Items A through R. Thomas seconded and the motion carried. A. Approval of Minutes. (CFN-198) Minutes of the workshop and regular Council meeting of January 17, 2012, were approved. B. Approval of Bills. (CFN-104) Payment of the bills received through November 30 and paid on November 30, 2011 after auditing by the Operations Committee on January 17, 2012, were approved. Checks issued for vouchers were approved: Date Check Numbers Amount 11/30/11 Wire Transfers 4849-4867 $ 6,860,785.55 11/30/11 Regular Checks 658821-659082 3,844,051.10 11/30/11 Use Tax Payable 542.54 $10,705,379.19 2 Kent City Council Minutes February 7, 2012 Payment of the bills received through December 15 and paid on December 15, 2011 after auditing by the Operations Committee on January 17, 2012, were approved. Checks issued for vouchers were approved: Date Check Numbers Amount 12/15/11 Wire Transfers 4868-4887 $2,032,553.82 12/15/11 Regular Checks 659083-659608 3,886,772.00 Void Checks 659166,659429,659658 (680.27) 12/15/11 Use Tax Payable 1,521.32 $5,920,166.87 Payment of the bills received through December 31 and paid on December 31, 2011 after auditing by the Operations Committee on January 17, 2012, were approved. Checks issued for vouchers were approved: Date Check Numbers Amount 12/31/11 Wire Transfers 4888-4907 $1,419,623.40 12/31/11 Regular Checks 659609-659916 3,286,053.94 12/31/11 Use Tax Payable 3,119.68 $4,708,797.02 Checks issued for payroll for December 1 through December 15 and paid on December 20, 2011, were approved: Date Check Numbers Amount 12/20/11 Checks 325801-325974 $ 124,682.47 12/20/11 Advices 292243-292893 1,239,785.77 $1,364,468.24 Checks issued for payroll for December 16 through December 31 and paid on January 5, 2012, were approved: Date Check Numbers Amount 1/5/12 Checks 325975-326145 $ 153,987.16 1/5/12 Advices 292894-293538 1,219,272.79 $1,373,259.95 C. Excused Absence for Councilmember. (CFN-198) An excused absence for Councilmember Ralph as she was unable to attend the February 7, 2012, meeting was approved. D. Alliance One Lease Agreement. (CFN-983) The Mayor was authorized to sign the Lease Agreement with Alliance One for a pay station located at the Kent Municipal Court and all acts consistent with this motion were ratified, subject to final lease terms and conditions acceptable to the Parks Director and City Attorney. 3 Kent City Council Minutes February 7, 2012 E. Annexation Sales Tax Threshold Resolution. (CFN-104) Resolution No. 1853 approving the certification of $3,452,428 for the Panther Lake annexation sales tax credit for the period of July 1, 2012, through June 30, 2013, was adopted. F. Human Services Commission, Amending Ordinance. (CFN-873) Ordinance No. 4029, amending Kent City Code Chapter 2.53 increasing the terms of appoint- ment for Human Services Commission youth representatives was adopted. G. Contract with JCI Jones Chemical for Water Treatment Chemicals. (CFN-675) The Mayor was authorized to sign the 2012 Water Treatment Chemical Supply Goods and Services Agreement with JCI Jones Chemicals, Inc. for Gas Chlorine and 25% Sodium Hydroxide, in an amount not to exceed $109,450, subject to final terms and conditions acceptable to the City Attorney and Public Works Director. The City Attorney explained that the contract provided in the agenda packet was inadver- tently done on the wrong form, but that the information is correct. He noted that the contract has been redone on the correct form and copies have been provided to Council members. H. Contract with Cascade Columbia for Water Treatment Chemicals. (CFN-675) The Mayor was authorized to sign the 2012 Water Treatment Chemical Supply Goods and Services Agreement with Cascade Columbia Distribution for Sodium Fluoride and Potassium Permanganate, in an amount not to exceed $29,028, subject to final terms and conditions acceptable to the City Attorney and Public Works Director. The City Attorney explained that the contract provided in the agenda packet was inadvertently done on the wrong form, but that the information is correct. He noted that the contract has been redone on the correct form and copies have been provided to Council members. I. Drinking Water State Revolving Fund Loan. (CFN-1065) The Mayor was authorized to sign the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund Loan in the amount of $2,020,000 to fund part of Kent's share in the building of the Tacoma Partnership Second Supply Pipeline Project's new Green River Water Treatment Plant Filtration Facility, amend the budget and authorize expenditure of the funds accordingly, subject to final terms and conditions acceptable to the City Attorney and Public Works Director. J. Seattle-King County Local Hazardous Waste Management Grant. (CFN-738) The Mayor was authorized to sign the Local Hazardous Waste Management Program Grant in the amount of $31,121.55 for 2012, amend the budget and expend the funds in accordance with the grant terms was authorized, subject to final terms and conditions acceptable to the City Attorney and Public Works Director. K. King County Waste Reduction & Recycling Grant. (CFN-904) The Mayor was authorized to sign the Waste Reduction and Recycling Grant in the amount of $178,020 for 2012 and 2013, amend the budget and expend the funds in accordance with the grant terms was authorized, subject to final terms and conditions acceptable to the City Attorney and Public Works Director. 4 Kent City Council Minutes February 7, 2012 L. Department of Ecoloav Coordinated Prevention Grant. (CFN-904/738) The Mayor was authorized to sign the Coordinated Prevention Grant Contract in the amount of $125,491, amend the budget and expend the funds in accordance with the grant terms was authorized, subject to final terms and conditions acceptable to the City Attorney and Public Works Director. M. Contract with Olympic Environmental Resources for Recycling. (CFN-904) The Mayor was authorized to sign a Goods and Services Agreement with Olympic Environmental Resources for waste reduction and recycling activities and programs for 2012 in the amount of $83,883.75, subject to final terms and conditions accept- able to the City Attorney and the Public Works Director. N. Stormwater Utility Property Lease. (CFN-1038) The Mayor was authorized to sign an agreement with Alecta Real Estate Kent Valley, LLC to lease stormwater utility property for a period of five years, subject to final terms and conditions acceptable to the City Attorney and the Public Works Director. O. Braun Final Plat. (CFN-1272) The final plat mylar for the Braun Plat was approved and the Mayor was authorized to sign the mylar. P. Kent Arts Commission Appointment. (CFN-839) The Mayor's reappointment of Wendy Johnson to the Kent Arts Commission and appointment of Jennifer Dye to the Kent Arts Commission, each for four-year terms, was confirmed. Q. Puget Sound Energy Access Easement and Agreement-Horseshoe Bend Levee. (CFN-1318) The Mayor was authorized to execute a construction agreement and an access easement with Puget Sound Energy to accommodate the construction of the Horseshoe Bend levee improvements, subject to final terms and conditions acceptable to the City Attorney and Public Works Director. R. Puaet Sound Energy Easement. (CFN-1318) The Mayor was authorized to sign a partial release of easement for Puget Sound Energy overhead facilities, with terms and conditions acceptable to the Public Works Director and City Attorney. OTHER BUSINESS A. Riverbend Golf Courses Netting. (CFN-118) The City Attorney noted that during the recent ice storm, the netting on the golf course became coated with ice, which pulled the netting down. He said because time is of the essence and because of various threats to people and property, he has prepared a resolution declaring an emergency, waiving competitive bidding requirements, and authorizing the mayor to hire a contractor to put the netting up. Parks Director Watling explained that he has been in contact with the insurance adjustor and with three netting services, and said staff will get the most competitive price possible. Thomas moved to adopt Resolution No. 1854 declaring an emergency, waiving competitive bid requirements, and authorizing the mayor to award a contract to 5 Kent City Council Minutes February 7, 2012 replace netting at the Riverbend Golf Course Driving Range. Higgins seconded and the motion carried. REPORTS A. Council President. (CFN-198) Higgins reminded everyone of the annual Council retreat to be held on February 10 and 11. B. Mayor. (CFN-198) No report was given. C. Administration. (CFN-198) Hodgson noted that there will be an Executive Session of approximately 30 minutes relating to property acquisition with no action anticipated, pending litigation with possible action, and a labor contract with action expected. D. Economic & Community Development Committee. (CFN-198) No report was given. E. Operations Committee. (CFN-198) No report was given. F. Parks and Human Services Committee. (CFN-198) Ranniger asked about the process related to use of the former Resource Center building as a homeless center, access to the building, and associated costs. Watling pointed out that the city is not currently in negotiations with the Union Gospel Mission, but agreed to make access to the building available to them if that is Council's desire. He noted that there is no budget to make tenant improvements to the building. He added that soon many other human service agencies will be requesting funding and said that this request could be added to that process. Ranniger stated that this is an opportunity to provide for economic stimulus and transitional placement and counseling. Albertson urged quick action and requested that she and all Council members be provided with rental agreements for all city-owned property. Hodgson emphasized the importance of following a process in order to protect the city. He noted that there is no documentation relating to rent or tenant improve- ments, and pointed out that the city closed the building due to the lack of funding. Perry stated that staff can begin due diligence, develop a lease agreement, and take it to committee and on to council in a relatively short period of time. G. Public Safety Committee. (CFN-198) Boyce noted that the next meeting will be on February 14 and that the meeting time has been changed to 4:30 p.m. H. Public Works Committee. (CFN-198) Albertson noted that the date for their next regular meeting (February 20) is a holiday, so that meeting has been rescheduled to February 13. I. Regional Fire Authority. (CFN-198) Thomas announced assignments recently given to the three Council representatives, and clarified issues relating to the bills recently mailed to residents. 6 Kent City Council Minutes February 7, 2012 EXECUTIVE SESSION The meeting recessed to Executive Session at 8:35 p.m. and reconvened at 9:10 p.m. Pending Litigation. (CFN-198) The City Attorney explained that the National Wildlife Federation has sued the Federal Emergency Management Agency regarding salmon protection and issuance of flood insurance. He said these issues threaten to seriously affect property in the Kent Green River valley, and asked for authority to intervene in that litigation in order to attempt to protect Kent's interests. Thomas moved to authorize the City Attorney to take all necessary action to intervene in the preliminary injunction and related proceedings in the National Wildlife Federation vs. FEMA litigation, and to ratify all acts consistent with this motion. Perry seconded and the motion carried. Labor Contract. (CFN-198) Hodgson noted that a one-year agreement has been reached with the Police Command staff. Thomas moved to authorize the Mayor to sign a one-year collective bargaining agreement with the Kent Police Officers Association (KPOA) — Assistant Chiefs & Commanders, effective January 1, 2012, through December 31, 2012, subject to final approval of terms and conditions by the City Attorney. Perry seconded and the motion carried. Mayor Cooke pointed out that all union contracts have been accepted with no cost-of- living increases, and thanked everyone involved. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 9:15 p.m. (CFN-198) Brenda Jacober, CMC City Clerk 7 Kent City Council Workshop February 7, 2012 Council Members Present: Boyce, Higgins, Perry, Ranniger and Thomas The meeting was called to order at 5:30 p.m. by Council President Higgins Legislative Update. Michelle Wilmot gave an update on issues in the state legislature and answered questions relating to revenue cuts. Governmental Relations. Higgins, Perry and Thomas reported on their attendance at regional meetings. Streets and Parks Infrastructure Funding. Hodgson noted that both the Public Works and the Parks Departments have assets to maintain, which requires funding. Parks Director Watling presented an analysis of the condition of parks assets, including how to find solutions and next steps. He outlined the permitting process and answered questions from Council members. Public Works Director LaPorte then gave a report on transportation funding, traffic volumes and the current condition of roads and bridges, including lane and strip patching. He presented potential sources of revenues, and responded to questions from Council members. Hodgson noted that a discussion on whether to fund the departments' needs separately or together will be held at the upcoming Council retreat. The meeting adjourned at 6:35 p.m. Brenda Jacober, CIVIC City Clerk w," Agenda Item: Consent Calendar - 7C TO: City Council DATE: February 21, 2012 SUBJECT: Excused Absence for Councilmember Ranniger - Approve MOTION: Approve an excused absence for Councilmember Ranniger as she is unable to attend the February 21, 2012, meeting. SUMMARY: EXHIBITS: Memorandum RECOMMENDED BY: BUDGET IMPACTS: None City Council 40 Dennis Higgins, Council President Phone: 253-856-5712 ' K E N T Fax 253-856-6712 WASHINGTON Address: 220 Fourth Avenue S. Kent, WA. 98032-5895 MEMORANDUM TO: Suzette Cooke, Mayor City Councilmembers FROM: Debbie Ranniger, Councilmember DATE: February 21, 2012 SUBJECT: City Council Excused Absence I would like to request an excused absence from the February 21, 2012 City Council meeting. I will be unable to attend. Thank you for your consideration. Debbie Ranniger Councilmember nc w," Agenda Item: Consent Calendar - 7D TO: City Council DATE: February 21, 2012 SUBJECT: Bicycle Advisory Board Appointment - Confirm MOTION: Confirm the Mayor's appointment of Joy Alford to the Kent Bicycle Advisory Board for a two-year term. SUMMARY: Ms. Alford's appointment to the Kent Bicycle Advisory Board for a two-year term ends October 31, 2013. EXHIBITS: Letter of Interest RECOMMENDED BY: Mayor Cooke BUDGET IMPACTS: None 7. F4r0 11 INFORMATION & RESOURCE GUIDE FOR A HEALTHY LIFESTYLE Dear Mayor Suzette Cooke, Thank you for taking the time to meet with us on Friday. It was a real pleasure! Today, I am writing as a follow up to our conversation. I'm interested in serving on the Bike Advisory board, I hope to become a significant contributor, learn as much as possible, while meeting like minded people. I have spent many years in the Kent area. With my responsibility as a mom, this gives me yet another reason to offer all I can. However, my duty goes beyond parenthood. Simply stated, I'm just a concerned resident who genuinely cares about our community. I'm interested in serving on the Bicycle Advisory board because I understand the value of biking is endless. Exercise, transportation, and social time are just a few reasons why biking is important, Personally, biking has been a great way for me to clear my mind, helping to put all thoughts in focus. I have never looked at it as a strenuous activity. Instead biking is something that can not only be shared with others but independently enjoyed, as well, These are just a few mindful reasons why I want to be a part of this delegation. Mayor Suzette, thank you again for your time on Friday and today. I look forward to moving forward with the Kent4Health committee, and the Bicycle Advisory board, As well, if there are any other areas I can share, learn and meet others, with similar values...[sincerely hope to have your consideration. Healthy Regards & Thank you, Joy Alford (206) 941-9748 HeAlthY PuBlisHeR LookFeelHealthy.com �� w," Agenda Item: Consent Calendar - 7E TO: City Council DATE: February 21, 2012 SUBJECT: Lodging Tax Advisory Committee Appointment - Confirm MOTION: Confirm the re-appointment of Barbara Smith to the Lodging Tax Advisory Committee. SUMMARY: The Lodging Tax Advisory Committee recommends Barbara Smith be re-appointed to the Lodging Tax Advisory Committee. Ms. Smith is the Executive Director of the Kent Downtown Partnership. Barbara Smith has asked to be re-appointed. The position is to be filled by a person involved in activities funded by lodging tax. Ms. Smith's new 3-year term will expire December 31, 2014 EXHIBITS: Letter RECOMMENDED BY: Mayor Suzette Cooke and Lodging Tax Advisory Committee BUDGET IMPACTS: None -oOOKENT DOWNTOWN PARTNERSHIP January 17, 2012 Dear Mayor Cooke and City Council: I, Barbara Smith, Executive Director of Kent Downtown Partnership, would like to thank you for appointing me to the Kent Lodging Tax Advisory Board. My term is up. I have enjoyed my term on the Kent Lodging Tax Advisory and hope you will reappoint me. My hope is that I have added value to the LTAB and would like to continue my work with the members on the Board. If you have questions, please feel free to contact me. Respectfully, Barbara Smith, Executive Director Kent Downtown Partnership 202 W.Gowe Street, Suite A Kent,WA 98032 253-813-6976 ba rba ras @ kentdowntown.orQ www.kentdowntownwa.com KENT Agenda Item: Consent Calendar — 7F TO: City Council DATE: February 21, 2012 SUBJECT: Write-offs of Uncollectible Accounts — Authorize MOTION: Authorize the write-off of six uncollectible accounts totaling $98,141.33. SUMMARY: This request is to write off the following six accounts: Bustos Media, $4,200 of the original $9,200 bill, for police patrol at the May 2008 Cinco de Mayo festival. No activity since April 2010. Ericka Malek DBA Store Corp., Poppa's Pub, gambling tax penalty, bankruptcy discharged for $509. Pacific Topsoils June 2004 water meter rental. Six year statute of limitations exceeded for $4,458. Alan M. Singer, original bill $1,200, bankruptcy discharged. Washington Hospitality, Fire Creek Grill, bills totaling $86,191.30, Golf Course, LLC Closed. AMB Property Corp., LID penalty, $1,582.99 waived per legal. EXHIBITS: RECOMMENDED BY: Operations Committee BUDGET IMPACTS: The budget impacts of these write offs are non-existent but the financial impact is a reduction to the working capital in the various funds. The actual impact is that we will continue to try to collect but since they are probably not collectable we need to take them off of our outstanding balances on our books. KENT Agenda Item: Consent Calendar - 7G TO: City Council DATE: February 21, 2012 SUBJECT: Washington Association of Sheriffs and Police Chiefs Grant - Accept MOTION: Authorize the Mayor to accept the Washington Association of Sheriffs and Police Chiefs grant in the amount of $11,550, amend the budget and authorize expenditure of funds in accordance with the grant terms acceptable to the Police Chief and City Attorney. SUMMARY: The funds from the WASPC Traffic Safety Equipment Grant will be used to purchase the following equipment: (1) Lidar, (2) Radars, (10) Sector Scanners and (10) Sector Printers. EXHIBITS: WASPC award letter dated 1/27/12, grant CFDA #20.600 RECOMMENDED BY: Public Safety Committee 2/14/12 BUDGET IMPACTS: None WASHINGTON ASSOCIATION OF SHERIFFS & POLICE CHIEFS 3060 Willamette Drive NY,Lacey,WA 99516-Phone:(360)486-2380--('ax:(360)486-2381-Website:wevw.wasp xsxmEese _....Serving the I,mv F.nEorcement.Community_and the Citizens ojWctshinK[aa � January 27, 2012 - 'm Chief Ken Thomas Kent Police Department j 220 4th Avenue South Kent, WA 98032 Dear Chief Thomas, Thank you for applying for a WASPC Traffic Safety Equipment Grant. We are pleased to I inform you that your agency has been approved to receive $11,550.00 to purchase the following equipment: (1) Lidar $3,000.00, (2) Radars $2,000.00, and Sector(10) Scanners $2,550.00 & (10) Printers $4,000.00 The Federal Identification number for this grant is CFDA#20.600. Invoices must be submitted to WASPC no later than May 1, 2012. Any invoices not received by the deadline will not be reimbursed and the award money will be forfeited. Please note: WASPC is responsible for the amount of your grant award only. Any expense in excess of the grant award must be paid by your agency. A report is required for the Traffic Safety Equipment Grant funds awarded to your department. The 2011-2012 Traffic Safety Equipment Grant reports are due by October 15, 2012. Failure to report will result in denial of 2012—2013 grant funds. For your convenience,the report form is enclosed with this letter. Your agency is responsible for subscribing to the following commitments: • Support statewidehnational traffic safety initiatives,projects, and programs • Report grant results to WASPC in a timely manner • Subscribe and commit to aggressive traffic enforcement Also attached is a revised Equipment Grant Agreement form. It was revised to include information pertaining to the Buy America Act. Please sign and return the fornr to Nancy Morris. Thank you for your dedication to traffic safety in the State of Washington. If you have any questions please contact Nancy Morris at (360) 486-2387. If you would like more information regarding state or federal traffic safety grant funding, please contact the Washington Traffic Safety Commission at(360) 725-9896. Sincerely, ppi,g Mitch Barker Executive Director Presidat Presidua elect Vice Pmsldent Past Precedent T..rer, SUERAHR ED HOLHES OZZIE KNEZOVICH RRUC.E R.IORK PAUL AYERS ,Shcr�. Ring Como, C'hif-Alerzerrsla,d Sheri-S} knne C'mnrty Chwf-WA fish@Wildll Chk1-Ismquoh Execnrivc Ronrd ERIC OLSEN TOM SCHLICKER KEN HORENHERG S'TEVEROYER RH.L FIXO Ck]f-K01.W Chref-%/,r m,h Chlef Kennewick S'herff-Krim,C'mnrly sherD-fVhnkvrn County RICHARD LATHIM RANDY STEGMEIER JOHN HA'TISIE LAURA LAUGHLIN HITCH BARKER Sheryg-Rankllrr Cmmry, Chief-IV,, nr IVAUrlvcrslry CMf WASmrc Papal SAC-tiBI.S'eahle &,oave Dw,Nr WASPC EQUIPMENT GRANT AGREEMENT FORM 1N ACCEPTING A WASPC EQUIPMENT GRANT,THE KENT POLICE DEPARTMENT AGREES TO COMPLY WITH THE FOLLOWING GRANT CONDITIONS: 1. The equipment received as a result of this grant will be used as part of a department safety program. 2. The equipment received as a result of this project will be distributed as part of an agency's commitment to traffic safety and active traffic enforcement. Agencies receiving grants are required(when possible)to support statewide traffic safety initiatives to include: ♦ Three Flags Enforcement Blitzes(10 days in February,July, and October) ♦ Holiday Safety Emphasis Patrols(Memorial Day,Labor Day, and Christnias/New Year's) Statewide activities will focus on Impaired Driving, Seatbelt/Child Car Seat Enforcement, and Speed Enforcement. Results of Blitz/Emphasis activity will be reported on quarterly activity reports. 3. Equipment purchases must comply with the provisions of the Buy America Act(49 U.S.C. 53230)) which contains the following requirements: Only steel, iron and manufactured products produced in the United States may be purchased with Federal funds unless the Secretary of Transportation determines that such domestic purchases would be inconsistent with the public interest;that such materials are not reasonably available and of a satisfactory quality; or that inclusion of domestic materials will increase the cost of the overall project contract by more than 25 percent. Clear justification for the purchase of non-domestic items must be in the form of a waiver request submitted to and approved by the Secretary of Transportation 4. Reports describing the use of the equipment and related enforcement activity will be submitted to WASPC. Reports are due no later than: ♦ October 15,2012 Reports will contain the following information: A) Recap of current traffic safety enforcement and educational activities B) Identified traffic safety issue addressed with this particular grant it C) Identified target audience D) Equipment acquired with WASPC Equipment Grant F,) Enforcement activities conducted F) Program success/Outcome(Final Report) G) Problems Encountered 11) Department contact for program Phone_____.._,_ SIGNED: DATE: (Chief or S erg SIGNED: f W DATE: 1/27/12 Mitch Barker, Executive Director KENT Agenda Item: Consent Calendar — 7H TO: City Council DATE: February 21, 2012 SUBJECT: Amend Kent City Code Section 9.39 - Towing Ordinance — Adopt MOTION: Adopt Ordinance No. , amending Chapter 9.39 of the Kent City Code, entitled "Towing," and updating provisions in order to be consistent with current state law and recent Supreme Court decisions. SUMMARY: On April 21, 2009, the United States Supreme Court ruled that warrantless searches of a motor vehicle after a driver's arrest and detention violated Amendment IV of the United States Constitution. Later that same year, the Washington State Supreme Court similarly ruled that warrantless searches violated article I, §7 of the Washington Constitution. This ordinance provides a code amendment that removes provisions allowing for a search incident to the arrest of the driver in accordance with these changes to federal and state law. Also, a hardship exists for the legal owner of a motor vehicle when his or her vehicle is impounded for a set period of time after a driver other than the legal owner is arrested for violation of RCW 46.20.342 (1)(a) (driving while license suspended or revoked in the first degree) or (1)(b) (driving while license suspended or revoked in the second degree). In those circumstances where the legal owner's motor vehicle is impounded after the driver is arrested for violation of these laws, and where the legal owner was neither the arrested driver nor aware the arrested driver was so suspended, this ordinance creates a one-time hardship exemption that allows the legal owner to immediately redeem his or her motor vehicle upon satisfaction of certain conditions as well as payment of all costs and fees associated with towing, impound, and storage. EXHIBITS: Ordinance RECOMMENDED BY: Public Safety Committee BUDGET IMPACTS: None ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE of the City Council of the City of Kent, Washington, amending Chapter 9.39 of the Kent City Code, entitled "Towing," updating provisions in order to be consistent with current state law and recent Supreme Court decisions. RECITALS A. On April 21, 2009, the United States Supreme Court ruled that warrantless searches of a motor vehicle after a driver's arrest and detention were violative of Amend. IV of the United States Constitution. Later that same year, the Washington State Supreme Court similarly ruled that warrantless searches violated article I, §7 of the Washington Constitution. B. This City's decision to amend the code by removing the provision allowing for a search incident to the arrest of the driver reflects these changes to the federal and state law. C. The city of Kent recognizes a hardship exists for the legal owner of a motor vehicle when his or her vehicle is impounded for a set period of time after a driver is arrested for violation of RCW 46.20.342 (1)(a) (driving while license suspended or revoked in the first degree) or (1)(b) (driving while license suspended or revoked in the second degree). 1 Revise KCC 9.39 Towing Ordinance In those circumstances where the legal owner of motor vehicle impounded after the driver is arrested for violation of RCW 46.20.342(1)(a) or (b), and the legal owner was neither the arrested driver nor aware the arrested driver was suspended, the City seeks to create a one-time hardship exemption whereby the legal owner may immediately redeem his or her motor vehicle upon satisfaction of certain conditions as well as payment of all costs and fees associated with towing, impound, and storage. NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: ORDINANCE SECTION 1. - Amendment. Chapter 9.39 of the Kent City Code is amended as follows: Sec. 9.39.010. Title and purpose. This chapter shall be known and cited as the towing ordinance and shall supplement Chapter 46.55 RCW which is currently adopted in KCC 9.36.010 (Model Traffic Ordinance). In the event that a conflict exists between the provisions of this chapter and Chapter 46.55 RCW, this chapter shall prevail. Sec. 9.39.020. Removal by police officer. In addition to the provisions of RCW 46.55.113, a police officer may take custody of a vehicle and provide for its prompt removal to a place of safety whenever a police officer finds a vehicle standing or parked in violation of RCW 46.61.570. Sec. 9.39.030. Impoundment of vehicles when driver arrested for violation of driving while license suspended or revoked or operation of motor vehicle under other license while suspended. 2 Revise KCC 9.39 Towing Ordinance A. Impoundment of vehicles authorized. 1. Whenever the driver of a vehicle is arrested for a violation of driving while license suspended or revoked (RCW 46.20.342) or operation of motor vehicle under other license or permit prohibited while license is suspended or revoked (RCW 46.20.345), as these provisions are currently enacted or hereafter amended, the vehicle is subject to impoundment at the direction of a law enforcement officer. 2. It shall be the responsibility of the owner or other person lawfully charged with possession of a vehicle to ensure that any person driving such vehicle has a valid license. It shall not be a defense to impoundment or to the payment of any of the costs of impound that the owner or other person lawfully charged with the vehicle was not aware that the driver's license was suspended, revoked, or otherwise invalid. B. Impoundment periods. 1. If a vehicle is impounded because the driver is arrested for a violation of RCW 46.20.342 (1)(c) (driving while license suspended or revoked in the third degree) or 46.20.345, the vehicle shall be redeemable immediately pursuant to subsection (13)(6) of this section. 2. If a vehicle is impounded because the driver is arrested for a violation of RCW 46.20.342 (1)(a) (driving while license suspended or revoked in the first degree) or 46.20.342(1)(b) (driving while license suspended or revoked in the second degree) and the Washington Department of Licensing's records show that the driver has not been convicted of a violation of RCW 46.20.342(1)(a) or (b) or equivalent local 3 Revise KCC 9.39 Towing Ordinance ordinance within the past five (5) years, the vehicle shall be impounded for thirty (30) days. 3. If a vehicle is impounded because the driver is arrested for a violation of RCW 46.20.342(1)(a) or (b) and the Washington Department of Licensing's records show that the driver has been convicted one (1) time of a violation of RCW 46.20.342(1)(a) or (b) or equivalent local ordinance within the past five (5) years, the vehicle shall be impounded for sixty (60) days. 4. If a vehicle is impounded because the driver is arrested for a violation of RCW 46.20.342 (1)(a) or (b) and the Washington Department of Licensing's records show that the driver has been convicted of a violation of RCW 46.20.342(1)(a) or (b) or equivalent local ordinance two (2) or more times within the past five (5) years, the vehicle shall be impounded for ninety (90) days. 5. At the conclusion of the applicable period of impoundment, if any, the registered owner, a person authorized by the registered owner, or one who has purchased the vehicle from the registered owner, who produces proof of ownership or authorization and signs a receipt therefor, may redeem an impounded vehicle. A towing contractor may use any reasonable means necessary to confirm that the person redeeming the vehicle is authorized to redeem the vehicle, and neither the city nor the tow company shall be responsible for any loss resulting from a delay during the time in which the towing contractor is confirming authorization. 6. Prior to redeeming the impounded vehicle, any person redeeming a vehicle impounded pursuant to this section shall pay the towing contractor for the costs of impoundment, including removal, 4 Revise KCC 9.39 Towing Ordinance towing, and storage fees accrued as a result of the impoundment. The towing contractor shall accept payment as provided in RCW 46.55.120 and other applicable statutes as currently enacted or hereafter amended. If the vehicle was impounded pursuant to this section and was being operated by the registered owner when it was impounded, it may not be released to any person until all traffic-related penalties, fines, and forfeitures owed by the registered owner have been satisfied. 7. A vehicle impounded pursuant to this section may be seaFEhed ' Eident to the affest of the dFive~ ~ inventoried incident to the impound of the vehicle pursuant to the laws of the state of Washington and the United States. With the exception of personal property seized by a police officer, personal property contained within an impounded vehicle shall continue to be the responsibility of its owner, or the person driving the vehicle, and shall be dealt with pursuant to the requirements of RCW 46.55.090 and other applicable statutes as now enacted or hereafter amended. Property which is attached to the vehicle with electronic wiring, or by bolts, screws, glue, or other adhesive material, shall be considered a component of, or a part of, the vehicle for purposes of impoundment. C. Impound hearing. 1. When a vehicle is impounded pursuant to this section, the tow truck operator shall send notice to the legal and registered owners as required by RCW 46.55.110 and other applicable statutes as now enacted or hereafter amended. 2. Any person seeking to redeem a vehicle impounded pursuant to this section has a right to a hearing in the Kent municipal court without a jury. The purpose of this hearing is solely to contest the validity of the 5 Revise KCC 9.39 Towing Ordinance impoundment or the amount of removal, towing, and storage fees. A person may waive the right to a hearing and, subject to the requirements of subsection (B) of this section, redeem the vehicle at the end of the applicable period. Failure to request a hearing pursuant to this subsection (C) shall constitute a waiver of the hearing. 3. A request for a hearing must: (a) be in writing in a form approved by the administrator of the Kent municipal court, (b) be signed by the person contesting the impound, and (c) be received by the Kent municipal court within ten (10) days of the date the notice of impoundment was mailed or given to such person pursuant to RCW 46.55.110 or 46.55.120(2)(a), whichever is later. At the time of the filing of the request for hearing, the petitioner must pay to the court a filing fee in the amount of thirty-nine dollars ($39.00). 4. The hearing shall be provided as follows: a. The court, within five (5) days after a proper request for a hearing has been received, shall set the hearing date and send notice of the date, time, and location of the hearing to the registered and legal owners of the vehicle or other item of personal property registered or titled with the Department of Licensing, the person requesting the hearing if not the owner, the tow truck operator, and the person or agency authorizing the impound. b. If the vehicle is still impounded at the time the written request is received, the court shall set the hearing within seven (7) days of receipt of the written request. If the vehicle has been released from impound at the time the written request is received, the court shall set the hearing within forty-five (45) days. 6 Revise KCC 9.39 Towing Ordinance C. Any person seeking a hearing who has failed to request such hearing within the time requirements set forth in subsection (C)(3) of this section may petition the court for an extension to file a request for hearing. Such extension shall be granted only upon the demonstration of good cause as to the reason(s) the request for hearing was not timely filed and only in the event that notice of the auction of the vehicle has not been published by the tow truck operator pursuant to the requirements of RCW 46.55.110, 46.55.130, and other applicable statutes as now enacted or hereafter amended. For the purposes of this section, "good cause" shall be defined as circumstances beyond the control of the person seeking the hearing that prevented such person from filing a timely request for hearing. In the event such extension is granted, the date of granting the extension shall be treated as the date the hearing request was received. In the event that an extension is granted, additional fees resulting from the storage of the vehicle caused by the delay in the hearing shall be paid by the person requesting the extension, regardless of whether the impound is determined to be lawful or unlawful. d. If a person fails to file a request for hearing within the time periods required, and no extension to file a request has been granted, the right to a hearing is waived, the impoundment and the associated costs of impoundment are deemed to be proper, and the city shall not be liable for any charges arising from the impound. e. For the purposes of this section, any computation of time shall be in accordance with Civil Rule 6(a) of the Washington Court Rules. f. Delivery of notices required by this section shall be deemed proper three (3) calendar days after the date such notice is sent 7 Revise KCC 9.39 Towing Ordinance by regular first class mail, or in any other manner reasonably calculated to reach the intended recipient. For the purposes of delivering notices required by this section, the address of the intended recipient which is either listed on a citation issued by a police officer, or which appears on any record maintained by or for the Department of Licensing, or which appears on any document or correspondence filed with the court by the intended recipient, shall be an appropriate and accurate address of the intended recipient. 5. Hearings shall, at the discretion of the court, be held by a judge, commissioner, judge pro tempore, or magistrate of the Kent municipal court, who shall determine whether the impoundment was proper and/or whether the associated removal, towing, storage, and any administrative fees were proper. The court may not adjust fees or charges that are in compliance with the posted or contracted rates. 6. The court may consider the criminal citation, the notice of traffic infraction, the authorization to impound created pursuant to KCC 9.39.040, and any other written report made under penalty of perjury submitted by the city of Kent or other impounding agency in lieu of the officer's personal appearance at the hearing. The court may also consider an abstract of driving record and electronically printed registration information, without further evidentiary foundation. Such records shall constitute prima facie evidence of the status of the driver's or contestant's license to drive a motor vehicle, the proper period of impoundment, or the ownership of the impounded motor vehicle. The person named in the notice may subpoena witnesses, including the officer, and has the right to present evidence and examine witnesses present in court. 8 Revise KCC 9.39 Towing Ordinance 7. The burden of proof is upon the city to establish that the impound was proper by a preponderance of the evidence. S. If the impoundment is found to be proper, the court shall enter an order so stating. The court's order shall provide that the impounded vehicle shall be released only after the applicable impound period has expired and the redemption requirements of subsections (13)(5) and (6) of this section have been satisfied. The court shall grant time payments only in the cases of extreme financial need, and only after a finding of such extreme financial need, and only where there is an assured and effective guarantee of payment. 9. If the impoundment is found to be improper, the court shall enter an order so stating and order the immediate release of the vehicle. If the costs of impoundment have already been paid, the court shall order the refund by the city of the costs of impoundment. If the impoundment is determined to be improper, and a filing fee was paid, the filing fee shall be returned to the payor. 10. In the event the court finds that the impoundment was proper, but the removal, towing, storage, or administrative fees charged for impoundment were not in compliance with the posted or contracted rates, the court shall determine the correct fees to be charged. If the costs of impoundment have been overpaid, the court shall order a refund by the towing company of the costs of impoundment for the amount of the overpayment. If the costs of impoundment have been overpaid, and a filing fee was paid, the filing fee shall be returned to the payor. 11. No determination of facts made at a hearing under this section shall have any collateral estoppel effect on a subsequent criminal 9 Revise KCC 9.39 Towing Ordinance prosecution and such determination shall not preclude litigation of those same facts in a subsequent criminal prosecution. 12. The hearing procedures set forth in this subsection shall apply only to hearings set pursuant to this section. 13. The court, in its discretion, may waive the filing fee required by subsection (C)(3) of this section upon proof by competent evidence that the person who is requesting the hearing is indigent as that term is defined in RCW 10.101.010(1). D. Economic or personal hardship — Rental cars — Vehicle dealer or lender with perfected security interest — Commercial or farm transport vehicles - Exceptions. 1. The court is authorized to release a vehicle impounded pursuant to this section prior to the expiration of any period of impoundment upon petition of the owner of the motor vehicle who was not the driver, provided he or she states under penalty of perjury that he or she was unaware the driver was suspended or revoked at the time of impoundment, or of a family member or dependent person of the driver based upon economic or personal hardship to such family member or dependent person resulting from the unavailability of the vehicle, and after consideration of the threat to public safety that may result from the release of the vehicle, including, but not limited to, the driver's criminal history, driving record, license status and access to the vehicle. If such release is authorized, the person redeeming the vehicle must satisfy the redemption requirements of subsection (B)(5) and (6) of this section. The decision to release the vehicle pursuant to this subsection shall not create any duty to protect any individual—nor shall it impart any costs, fees, or 10 Revise KCC 9.39 Towing Ordinance other financial obligations associated with the removal, towing, and/or storage of the vehicle to the City, provided the removal, towing, and/or storage were lawful under the Kent Municipal Code or the Revised Code of Washington. Further, neither the decision to release the vehicle nor any determination of facts at a hearing under this section, shall provide a defense in any subsequent criminal prosecution, or have any collateral estoppel effect or preclude litigation of those same facts in a subsequent criminal prosecution. The release of a vehicle pursuant to this subsection shall be available to an owner or —relative or dependent person of the driver one (1) time only. 2. Pursuant to RCW 46.55.120, as now enacted or hereafter amended, a rental car business may immediately redeem a rental vehicle it owns upon payment of the costs of removal, towing, and storage. 3. Pursuant to RCW 46.55.120, as now enacted or hereafter amended, a motor vehicle dealer or lender with a perfected security interest in the vehicle may immediately redeem or repossess a vehicle it owns upon payment of the costs of removal, towing, and storage. 4. Pursuant to RCW 46.55.113(3), as now enacted or hereafter amended, before the summary impoundment of a commercial vehicle or farm transport vehicle when the driver is not the owner of the vehicle, the police officer shall attempt in a reasonable and timely manner to contact the owner of the vehicle and may release the vehicle to the owner, or designee of the owner, if either is reasonably available, as long as the owner or designee states under penalty of perjury that he or she was unaware the driver was suspended or revoked. This remedy shall not be available when the owner has received a prior release under this subsection or RCW 46.55.120(1)(a)(ii). In the event that the owner or 11 Revise KCC 9.39 Towing Ordinance designee cannot be contacted in a reasonable and timely manner, or is not reasonably available, then he or she may immediately redeem the vehicle he or she owns upon payment of towing, removal, and storage costs. 5. Nothing in this section may derogate from the powers of police officers under the common law. 6. For the purposes of this section, "farm transport vehicle" means a motor vehicle owned by a farmer and that is being actively used in the transportation of the farmer's or another farmer's farm, orchard, aquatic farm, or dairy products, including livestock and plant or animal wastes, from point of production to market or disposal, or supplies or commodities to be used on the farm, orchard, aquatic farm, or dairy, and that has a gross vehicle weight rating of 7,258 kilograms (16,001 pounds) or more. E. Sale of vehicle. Any vehicle impounded pursuant to this section shall be subject to the sale provisions of RCW 46.55.130 and other applicable statutes, as now enacted or hereafter amended. F. Authority to enforce. The chief of police, or his or her designee, and the court are hereby authorized to implement such administrative procedures as may be necessary to carry out the directives of this section. Sec. 9.39.040. Authorization to impound. When an officer authorizes the impound of a motor vehicle pursuant to this chapter, such authorization shall state the basis for the impound; the ordinance or statute which authorizes the impound; the date, time, and place of the impound; and the officer who authorized the impound. Such authorization shall be delivered to the towing contractor within twenty-four (24) hours of 12 Revise KCC 9.39 Towing Ordinance the impoundment. The towing contractor shall deliver the authorization to impound to the registered and legal owners of the vehicle with the other required information and within the time period required by RCW 46.55.110. SECTION 2, — Severabilitv. If any one or more section, subsection, or sentence of this ordinance is held to be unconstitutional or invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this ordinance and the same shall remain in full force and effect. SECTION 3, — Corrections by City Clerk or Code Reviser. Upon approval of the City Attorney, the City Clerk and the code reviser are authorized to make necessary corrections to this ordinance, including the correction of clerical errors; references to other local, state or federal laws, codes, rules, or regulations; or ordinance numbering and section/subsection numbering. SECTION 4, — Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force thirty (30) days from and after its passage as provided by law. SUZETTE COOKE, MAYOR ATTEST: BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK 13 Revise KCC 9.39 Towing Ordinance APPROVED AS TO FORM: TOM BRUBAKER, CITY ATTORNEY PASSED: day of 12012. APPROVED: day of 12012. PUBLISHED: day of 12012. I hereby certify that this is a true copy of Ordinance No. passed by the City Council of the City of Kent, Washington, and approved by the Mayor of the City of Kent as hereon indicated. (SEAL) BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK P:\Civil\Ordinance\Towing Ordinance Amend 9.39.docx 14 Revise KCC 9.39 Towing Ordinance KENT Agenda Item: Consent Calendar — 7I TO: City Council DATE: February 21, 2012 SUBJECT: Day Wireless Systems Contract for VHF Radio Antenna System — Authorize MOTION: Authorize the Mayor to sign a consultant services agreement with Day Wireless Systems in an amount not to exceed $22,606.82 for the replacement and installation of radio antennas and cables on Water Tank #5 near James and 98th Street, subject to final terms and conditions acceptable to the City Attorney and Public Works Director. SUMMARY: This project involves the replacement of the VHF Emergency Radio antennas, RF cables and related site improvements located on the City's Water Tank #5 near James and 98th Street. Replacement was planned for the lst quarter of 2012 due to the mandated VHF Narrow-banding by the Federal Communication Commission (FCC). In addition, equipment age and recent inclement weather have played a role in the loss of reception and transmission performance of the radio system. Public Works received three contractors' bids for the removal and disposal of the existing system, installation /securing of the VHF antennas and RF cables, installation of a new ground system, integrating racking (Ice Bridge) from the tank leg to the existing building, installation of a cable tray inside the building, providing final connection to existing VHF repeaters and conducting testing. EXHIBITS: Scope of Work and Site Map RECOMMENDED BY: Public Works Committee BUDGET IMPACTS: The capital funding was budgeted and approved for 2012. It is an element of the VHF Radio System Upgrade to meet the FCC Narrow-band mandate deadline of January 1, 2013. EXHIBIT A SCOPE OF WORK The Contractor shall provide the following services: • Install three antennas at Water Tank #5 (one customer supplied MFD 4503 antenna) • Ground, terminate and test all associated coax for the new antennas • Install ice bridge from the water tank leg to existing building • Upgrade ground system • Install new 4 port entry port inside the building • Add cable tray for new coax • Remove and dispose of all existing cables, and debris from worksite All work must meet EIA (Electronic Industries Alliance) standards. EXHIBIT A Quote DAAnna Quote# 1504-11546-1 WIRELESS S+y57rm5. Date: 1/3/2012 2415 South 200th Expiration Date: 4/2/2012 SeaTac, WA 98198 Phone: 206-878-3750 Fax: 206-878-1926 rmlers uMaywireless.corn To: Wayne Gilbert City of Kent a es Person Project NOMe I Paymenterms' c I ank b Net Labor Description of Work Total MOBILIZE $1,140.00 INSTALL ICE BRIDGE $2,000.00 INSTALL ANTENNA MOUNTS $750.00 INSTALL ANTENNAS $630.00 INSTALL COAX HANGERS $630.00 INSTALL COAXES $1,260.00 INSTALL HOIST GRIPS $210.00 INSTALL GROUND KITS $420.00 INSTALL BUS BARS $250.00 INSTALL GROUND RODS $500.00 DIG GROUNDING $1,260.00 BACKF I LL $420.00 INSTALL CABLE TRAY $1,000.00 INSTALL ENTRY PORT $210.00 SWEEP TEST $210.00 Labor Total: $10 890.00 Parts&Materials QTY Description Price Extended Price 500 7/8 COAX $5.86 $2,930.00 6 7/8 CONNECTORS $33.57 $201.42 9 7/8 GROUND KIT $18.00 $162.00 3 GROUND BAR $92.86 $278.58 1 ICE BRIDGE KIT $785.71 $785.71 1 ENTRY PANEL $92.86 $92.86 1 ENTRY BOOT $64.29 $64.29 3 1/2 JUMPERS $107.14 $321.42 2 VHF ANTENNA DB224 $704.29 $1,408.58 100 #2 TINNED $2.57 $257.00 10 #2 LUGS $8.57 $85.70 40 #2 THHN $2.29 $91.60 10 CAD SHOTS $7.14 $71.40 2 GROUND ROD $78.57 $157.14 17 COAX HANGERS $55.491 $943.33 17 ANGLE ADAPTERS $45.71 $777.07 12 CONCRETE $7.14 $85.68 1 PIPE $171.43 $171.43 3 ANTENNA CLAMPS $71.43 $214.29 EXHIBIT A 3 HOIST GRIPS $24.29 $72.87 3 CABLE TRAY $142.86 $428.58 3 1POLYPHASERS $92.861 $278.58 Parts & Materials Total: $9,879.53 Other Expenses Description Total EQUIPMENT SHIPPING (1% OF EQP PRICE) $104.00 Other Total: $104.00 Taxes: $1,733.29 Grand Total: $22,606.82 Exemptions' Quotation for goods and services named. To Accept this quotation, si n here and return: Date: Thank you for your Business . / �J I/� ul„� �r /l��r�i i • �� ,� l r �/��rjri�/ " ��r l'�// ra/INS ar, / I ' l��i�//�i 0/ v w I �/ ji II�✓)�9� rY j �� / � ;r r Y rI / 1i�N k i .r fVNi� r �� �,/ 9j' r Y � II ✓ ;, /� / fff 00 Ln KENT Agenda Item: Consent Calendar — 73 TO: City Council DATE: February 21, 2012 SUBJECT: Geo Engineers Contract for Guiberson Reservoir — Authorize MOTION: Authorize the Mayor to sign a Consultant Services Agreement with GeoEngineers, Inc., for geotechnical investigations engineering services for the Guiberson reservoir replacement in an amount not to exceed $17,080, subject to final terms and conditions acceptable to the City Attorney and Public Works Director. SUMMARY: The Guiberson Reservoir is approximately 70 years old and needs to be replaced. GeoEngineers, Inc. was selected to perform geotechnical investigations for the new reservoir. These investigations will include boring samples of the soil, laboratory testing and analysis of the soils and their suitability for tank construction. This information will be used by the tank consultant to design the foundation of the new tank. Geotechnical investigation work is highly specialized work. City staff does not possess the equipment or the specific professional licensing to perform this work. EXHIBITS: Scope of Work RECOMMENDED BY: Public Works Committee BUDGET IMPACTS: Funds for this work have been included in the 2012 water budget. GEOENGINEERS 1101 South Fawcett Avenue,Suite 200 Tacoma, Washington 98402 253.383.4940 EXHIBIT A SCOPE OF SERVICES GEOENGINEERS, INC. GUIBERSON RESERVOIR REPLACEMENT PROJECT CITY OF KENT JANUARY 31, 2012 FILE NO. 0410-174-02 Our scope of services for the Guiberson Reservoir Replacement includes: 1. Explore subsurface conditions by drilling four borings to an approximate depth of 35 feet. 2. Consult with City of Kent and/or Gray and Osborne Engineering regarding site planning. 3. Develop and provide recommendations for design of foundation support of the proposed water tank. 4. Provide estimates of settlement. 5. Provide recommendations relative to site grading and any filling consisting of compaction criteria and fill quality. 6. Provide a geotechnical report summarizing our work. Attachment: Exhibit B. Fee Estimate 6WH:tt I:➢isrlairnEx:Anp eler,Cronlr,hann,1'acnimide or haul ropy of the mional document(email,Cext,table,and/or ligurEe),if provirded,and any al:lachmenUs are only a ropry of the odglmal dorunieof.The of iginal document isslored by 6eo ftineus,Iric.and will verve as the olflclal documen I of rerorrd. Copyrdghf()219.21ry GeoEriglneevs}Iric. All dghls reserved. EXHIBIT B FEE ESTIMATE CITY OF KENT GUIBERSON RESERVOIR REPLACEMENT PROJECT 0410-174-02 Classification Hours x Rate = Cost Principal - Project Manager(Gary Henderson) 20 x $160 = $3,200 Staff Engineer/Scientist 2(Craig Jordan) 16 x $115 = $1,840 Project Engineer 50 X $115 = $5,750 Support 8 x $80 = $640 Subtotal Personnel Cost (direct costs) $11 430 Other Expenses Subcontracted Drilling $5,000 Laboratory Testing $200 Mileage Field Equipment $450 Subtotal $5 650 Total Estimated Costs $17,080 File No. 0410-174-02 G E®ENGINEERS January 30, 2012 KENT Agenda Item: Consent Calendar - 7K TO: City Council DATE: February 21, 2012 SUBJECT: JA Brennan Associates, PLLC, Contract - Levee Wall Aesthetics Design and Irrigation Design Boeing Levee - Authorize MOTION: Authorize the Mayor to sign a consultant services contract agreement with JA Brennan Associates, for Levee wall aesthetic design and irrigation design at Three Friends Fishing Hole for the Boeing levee project in the amount not to exceed $28,793, subject to final terms and conditions acceptable to the City Attorney and Public Works Director. SUMMARY: Consultants hired to certify the Boeing levee found deficiencies in the north end of the levee segment at the Three Friends Fishing Hole park. Proposed improvements include a secondary levee and floodwall which will address these deficiencies. This work is necessary for FEMA accreditation of the Boeing levee. The proposed consultant services contract with JA Brennan Associates allows for an architectural design of the proposed floodwall without minimizing its function to reduce flood risk. The consultant will consider the existing features and aesthetics of the Three Friends Fishing Hole Park to prepare a wall design that blends well with the park surroundings. This contract also includes redesign of the irrigation system to maintain the park's lawn and plantings after flood protection improvements are in place. Public Works and Parks staff have reviewed and agreed on this proposed contract. This levee reach, in combination with the other levee segments along the Green River, protect the Kent Valley business and residential areas from flood risks. EXHIBITS: Scope of Work RECOMMENDED BY: Public Works Committee BUDGET IMPACTS: The City received a $2.07-million grant from the State legislature for work on the Boeing levee. Expenditures from this contract are eligible for reimbursement through the state grant. Schedule A fy j. f; _a, brerinan Date:February 8, 2012 "'" t �s, ,t s ,.r i landscape Architects&Planners 100 S.King Street,Suite 200,Seattle,WA 98104 t 206.583-0620 £206.583.0623 w .jabrennan.com J.A. Brennan Associates Three Friends Fishing Hole Park—Irrigation Restoration Design Scope of Work PHASE 1: DESIGN Site Inventory and Analysis and Coordination The Consultant will review irrigation as-built plans and Parks Department product preferences. J.A. Brennan Associates will conduct 1 site visit and attend up to 1 client/team meeting during design phases below. Park Irrigation Restoration Design (50%,90%,and 100% Design) The Consultant shall design and prepare details for irrigation restoration for the park as required to repair the existing irrigation system after impacts from grading and new wall construction. Site visits and client meetings will be coordinated with the wall aesthetic design work for improved efficiency. The irrigation restoration consists of restoring the existing irrigation system in Three Friends Fishing Hole Park by replacing damaged lines and heads as necessary to create an irrigation system that provides full coverage for all disturbed park areas. Irrigation specifications will be provided by City of Kent Parks Department and will be reviewed by J.A.Brennan Associates for consistency with the constriction plans and details. I. Irrigation restoration plan(2 sheets at V=20' scale) 2. Irrigation Details(1 sheet) 3. Review irrigation specification provided by the City of Kent 4. Construction cost estimate PHASE 2: CONSTRUCTION SUPPORT Bid Support Answer contractor's questions during bidding. Any required addenda to be provided by City. Construction Support We assume City of Kent will conduct all constriction management. J.A. Brennan will provide limited support by answering questions commensurate with the number of hours allocated in the attached spreadsheet. Page 1 of II Sconc Assumptions 1. The City will coordinate, organize and document all inter-departmental meetings. 2. City of Kent will provide an AutoCad site survey that shows 1-foot or 2-foot topographic contours, location of vegetation including shrubs and trees, edge of pavement, location of utility poles and lines,property lines, and irrigation as-built information. 3. Drawings on 22"x34"will be prepared to 100%level of completion showing major project elements. Title block and base information shall be provided by the client. 4. The client will provide coordinated review comments at each review stage. Additional fee will be required for additional review steps. 5. Site visits and client meetings will be coordinated with the wall aesthetic design work for improved efficiency. If the wall aesthetic design project is not contracted with JA Brennan,additional fee will be required for design meetings and construction site visits. 6. Permitting support and shoreline development mitigation design are not included in this scope. 7. No irrigation restoration will be provided on the east side of the wall. 8. Completion of construction documents will be by April 30, 2012. 9. All specifications will be provided by the City. 10. No permit or permit support services are provided. 11. The duplication and distribution of all design and bid documents shall be by client. 12. Structural and civil engineering is by others. 13. J.A.Brennan will provide drawings and costs to the City for inclusion into one package for bid purposes. 14. Project will be bid as a lump sum bid package. 15. J.A. Brennan Associates accepts no liability for design and consulting provided by other team members. 16. JA Brennan Associates can provide construction administration services and record drawings for additional fee. i Page 2 of 2 Schedule B Or Date:February 8,2012 r Landscape Architects &Planners 100 S. King Street,Suite 200,Seattle,WA 98104 t. 206.583-0620 f 206.583.0623 w�vw.jabrennan.com J.A. Brennan Associates Three Friends Fishing Hole Park-Wall Aesthetic Design Scope of Work PHASE 1: DESIGN Preliminary Wall Aesthetic Design The Consultant will provide services to study, evaluate, and recommend wall aesthetic concepts in support of the preliminary engineering effort for the preferred alternative. It is assumed that only limited construction budget will be allocated for aesthetics and,therefore,wall aesthetic studies will focus on means to improve wall aesthetics that do not significantly alter the wall concepts nor that require any significant additional structural engineering effort. This task includes the following: 1. A site visit to gather information on existing conditions and critical viewpoints of the proposed project. Gather information about local history and natural history as potential inspiration for wall I aesthetic design. 2. Kick-off Meeting with City of Kent and structural engineer to be conducted with site visit described above. 3. Review and evaluation of the current preliminary concrete wall engineering design and exploration of wall elements that can potentially be modified for aesthetic purposes. 4. Two theme alternatives and 1 aesthetic concept for each theme will be described in a brief technical metro. 5. Develop 2 elevation sketches, one elevation to develop and illustrate each of two aesthetic design concepts. Elevations will illustrate wall surface treatment options (textures and colors)and railing character. 6. Client meeting to discuss aesthetic design alternatives. Client to select preferred concept and give clear design direction on preferred wall aesthetic character. 7. Draft aesthetic design of preferred concept. Develop elevation sketch of the preferred alternative concept,including potential colors and textures and railing. Page 1 of 3 i 8. Revise draft aesthetic design of preferred alternative as required to develop final preferred alternative concept. Design will be illustrated in I elevation of a representative segment of the wall, and a brief tech memo design summary identifying products and materials for finishes and railing. 9. Client meeting to review final aesthetic design concept and coordinate with structural engineer. Final Wall Aesthetic Design Site Inventory and Analysis and Coordination The Consultant will review preliminary engineering plans and existing conditions data as necessary. J.A. Brennan Associates will attend up to 2 client/team meetings during final design phases below. Final Wall Aesthetic Design (50%,90%, and 100% Design) The Consultant shall design and prepare details for concrete wall aesthetic elements of the project as identified in the preliminary design phase. Wall aesthetic design will include detailed design of wall finishes, including wall surface textures/form liner,materials, and colors. Railing design will also be provided. Any potential landform design recommendations will be provided as sketches at 50% design only and will be provided to the structural engineer for incorporated into the engineering drawings. Deliverables for the wall aesthetic design shall include the following: l. Wall Finishes and Railing Details(2 sheets) 2. Specifications for wall finishing/materials and railing(CSI format) 3. Construction cost estimate I PHASE 2: CONSTRUCTION SUPPORT i Bid Support Answer contractor's questions during bidding. Any required addenda to be provided by City, if necessary. Construction Support We assume City of Kent will conduct all construction management. J.A. Brennan will provide limited support,by answering questions commensurate with the number of hours allocated in the attached spreadsheet. Scope Assumptions 1. The City will coordinate, organize and document all inter-departmental meetings. 2. City of Kent will provide an AutoCad site survey that shows 1-foot or 2-foot topographic contours, location of vegetation including shrubs and trees, edge of pavement,location of utility poles and lines, and property lines. 3. Drawings on 22"x34"will be prepared to 100%level of completion showing major project elements. Title block and base information shall be provided by the client. 4. The client will provide coordinated review comments at each review stage. Additional fee will be required for additional review steps. 5. Site visits and client meetings will be coordinated with the irrigation design work for improved efficiency. If the irrigation design project is not contracted with JA Bremian, additional fee will be required for design meetings and construction site visits. Page 2 of 3 6. Graphics will be hand-drawn in preliminary design. 7. J.A. Brennan may provide input on the grading plan,which will be designed by others. R. Permitting support and shoreline development mitigation design are not included in this scope. 9. Completion of construction documents will be by April 30, 2012. 10. Specifications will not be provided at preliminary design. 11. Specifications will be provided in CSI format, version 2004. 12. No permit or permit support services are provided. 13. The duplication and distribution of all design and bid documents shall be by client. 14. Structural and civil engineering is by others. 15. J.A. Brennan will provide drawings, specs and costs to the City for inclusion into one package for bid purposes. 16. J.A.Brennan Associates accepts no liability for design and consulting provided by other team members. 17. JA Brennan Associates can provide construction administration services and record drawings for additional fee. i i i I i i Page 3 of 3 Oo o voi C N - _ o0om 000 0000oao x'a 10 N N {3 O O O O .� O V' �' : N Cl� fP yp < N N T„ N V m � N N N ov N N M 0 0 © m om om o m a 0 g in F J � 7 U Z I O Mt J v Q W 3 aI �n 4V N Q N � a M T c ly c 0 W jm o ! ry U _ W a R C � Ln Y O U P ry y p W v y O1 n PY, a W 01 Z 1= w c m d .� A o 0 0 8 y a c N ZZ = U O N m c „ :: P "� . w u U m m c `L W LL W a o o P 0. $ `m ry §. t P A ? W LL C] a I-. U YI N `m V aH � W �.,, aQr,N [9 . .m � NIV .- Ncn!V t00 O LLLr c� � :O O -4 7ET 7Z7 -6 41 f2 7t O 16 Eq F 8 p U 1- 3501 T I i j i O � I m � r O L tl fA � s Q O I � 2 V o it m Ip il4 �3 uq y a w d U O c YY ' 0 d (dn y g 2 B I j p 'I KENT Agenda Item: Consent Calendar — 7L TO: City Council DATE: February 21, 2012 SUBJECT: GEI Contract for Briscoe Desimone — Authorize MOTION: Authorize the Mayor to sign the Consultant Services Contract with GEI Consultants, Inc., to perform analysis and certification of the Desimone and Briscoe Levees in an amount not to exceed $284,883, subject to final terms and conditions acceptable to the City Attorney and Public Works Director. SUMMARY: This contract will provide the City a complete package for submitting a Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) for the levee section on the right bank (easterly side) of the Green River between S. 200th St. and S. 180th St. This section is known as the Desimone and Briscoe levees. The levee project is 2.7 river miles in length and is adjacent to warehouses, Briscoe Park, and West Valley Highway. The Desimone levee is within the Tukwila city limits. EXHIBITS: Scope of Work RECOMMENDED BY: Public Works Committee BUDGET IMPACTS: This contract will be funded out of the City's Storm Drainage Fund. January 27, 2012 EConauhams Mr. Ken Langholz City of Kent Public Works Department 220 Fourth Avenue South Kent, WA 98032 Re: Proposal for Engineering Services - Revised Green River Levee FEMA Accreditation—Briscoe/Desimone Levee City of Kent,Washington Dear Mr. Langholz: We are pleased to submit this proposal to provide engineering services for support of FEMA accreditation of the right bank Green River levee reach known as the Briscoe/Desimone Levee, which extends between the South 180a' Street bridge (downstream end at River Mile 14.3) and the South 200th Street bridge (upstream end at River Mile 17.0). Our proposed scope of work is based on our review of available information provided by the City of Kent and our telephone conversation with you, Mr. Tim LaPorte, Mr. Chad Bieren, Mr. Mike Mactutis, Mr. Mark Howlett, and Mr. Alex Murillo on January 18, 2012. We have revised our proposal to address your comments communicated in our January 26 phone conversation. PROJECT UNDERSTANDING The City of Kent(City)has initiated an engineering evaluation and certification process for the levees along the right bank of the Green River, with the overall objective of obtaining Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) accreditation of the levee in its Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMS)for the area. The City has divided the levees along the right bank into six levee reaches, and accreditation packages have already been prepared and submitted to FEMA. The accreditation package for the Briscoe/Desimone Levee has been prepared by GeoEngineers Inc. of Tacoma, WA. Because of the high asset value and critical nature of the facilities protected by this levee,the City desires an independent evaluation and stand-alone FEMA Accreditation report to be prepared by GEI. The Briscoe/Desimone Levee has a length of approximately 2.7 miles, of which about 1.2 miles are within the City of Tukwila and 1.5 miles are within the City of Kent. The levee has never been accredited by FEMA. The levee protects land uses ranging from large-scale industrial properties to commercial and some residential developments. We are not aware if design or construction information is available for the levee. w .geiconsultants.com GEI Consultants,Inc. 180 Grand Avenue,Suite 1410,Oakland,California 94612 510.350.2900 fax 510.350.2901 Mr. Ken Langholz January 27, 2012 Interior drainage for the area protected by the levee primarily flows away from the levee (toward the east) and is conveyed to the river via a stream known as Lower Mill Creek. Between River Mile 14.4 and River Mile 14.5 there are five Washington State DOT stormwater gravity outfalls that are connected to catch basins draining the road located on top of the levee and other high ground areas. The outfalls have not been inspected in the recent past, but we understand they are located above the 100-year flood elevation. Flows in the Green River are controlled to a significant degree by upstream regulation at the Corps of Engineers' Howard Hanson Dam, located at River Mile 64.5, i.e., approximately 47.5 miles upstream of the S. 200th Street bridge. The Corps manages the dam outflows to maintain a regulated condition target flow of 12,000 cubic feet per second(cfs)for floods with return periods greater than 2 years as measured at USGS gage 12113000 near Auburn. The Corps estimates that the dam has adequate capacity to regulate up to the 140-year flood. The authorized operation calls for the target discharge to be maintained for a period of up to 9 days. The Corps' Water Control Manual also sets a stage rate of fall during flood recession not to exceed 1 foot per hour. An important assumption of the work as scoped herein is that the dam remains capable to regulate up to the 140-year flood and that the operational criteria described in its Water Control Manual have not changed. If the City knows of any potential changes, we request that they be disclosed for evaluation. Since completion of the dam in 1962, the target flow at the Auburn gage has been slightly exceeded in at least three events: December 1975 (12,100 cfs), February 1996 (12,400 cfs), and November 2006 (12,200 cfs). A total of 39 flood peaks greater than 9,000 cfs have reportedly occurred between 1962 and 2006. We understand that the effective (printed) Green River Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMS) were based on 1970s channel data and topographic mapping and the most recent hydraulic analyses used in preparing those maps were completed in the 1980s. In 2007, FEMA issued Preliminary Digital Flood Insurance Rate Maps (DFIRM)for King County. FEMA's Preliminary DFIRM used Base Flood Elevation (BEE) data from the effective maps together with updated topographic data collected for their study. However, the preliminary DFIRM simply extended the in-channel BFEs across the floodplain to estimate the effects of levee failures, resulting in overly conservative mapping of the floodplain. King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks (KCDNRP) retained Northwest Hydraulic Consultants (NHC)to complete a floodplain mapping study for the Lower Green River, River Mile 3.85 to 33.25 (State Highway 18). The study was submitted to FEMA to appeal FEMA's preliminary revision to the published FIRMS and Flood Insurance Study (FIS) for Unincorporated King County and the Cities of Auburn, Kent, Renton, and Tukwila in March 2010. As part of the March 2010 NHC study, a steady-state HEC-RAS model was developed to simulate the hydraulic characteristics of the Green River under the condition that all levees remain in place. This model was calibrated to several recent flow events and has been approved by the City. Based on the results of the model, the calculated 100-year flood flow is approximately 12,800 cfs along the subject levee reach. The model provides the water surface profile for use in the levee FEMA accreditation studies. 2 Mr. Ken Langholz January 27, 2012 Along the subject levee reach the river channel is bounded by the levee and is quite sinuous. The bottom of the river channel is on the order of 30 to 35 feet below the levee crest. The land behind the levee is typically 5 to 10 feet lower than the levee crest. The bank/levee slope has suffered localized damage during recent flood events, primarily consisting of sloughing of over-steepened slopes. A 600-foot-long section of the Briscoe levee was rehabilitated and set back in 2007 as a joint King County/Corps of Engineers project. Between 1998 and 2003, about 1,300 feet of the Desimone levee was set back 20 to 25 feet landward. A vegetated mid- slope bench was formed and logs with root wads were placed and secured below the ordinary high water mark to create low-velocity zones and cover for juvenile salmonids. SCOPE OF WORK Based on our understanding of the project objective, we propose that the scope of work be structured in nine tasks as follows: 1. Project Kickoff Meeting and Initial Site Visit 2. Review of Existing Documentation and Levee History 3. Supplemental Subsurface Explorations 4. Survey Coordination 5. Engineering Evaluations 6. Operations and Maintenance Manual 7. Conceptual Design to Address Deficiencies 8. FEMA Accreditation Report 9. Project Management and Coordination Our proposed scope is limited to evaluating the levee for compliance with the design criteria outlined in 44 CFR 65.10, providing recommendations and design concepts for addressing deficiencies, and producing a summary report. The detailed design of repairs for deficiencies identified through the course of our work is not included in this scope of work. The proposed scope, deliverables, and major assumptions for each task are summarized below. 1. Proiect Kickoff Meeting and Initial Site Visit: We will attend a kickoff meeting with City staff at the City's Department of Public Works offices. During this meeting we will: • Re-introduce key project personnel and re-establish connections between GEI and City personnel. • Review and confirm or refine the overall project schedule and deliverable expectations. • Improve our understanding of the levee reach, interior drainage facilities, and work that has been done by GeoEngineers, NHC, and others to date. • Gather supplemental data from the City relevant to the project and identify any other sources of information about the levee system. These would include, detailed topography map, utility plans, levee performance records, and records of repair work or modifications to the levee system. • Obtain the most recent Corps of Engineers' Periodic Inspection reports for the levee, obtain available drawings, surveys, and other records of levee repairs in which the Corps was involved, and meet with Corps staff if appropriate. 3 Mr. Ken Langholz January 27, 2012 • Meet with King County Flood Control staff and obtain their observations of levee performance and available drawings, surveys, and other records of levee repairs in which King County was involved. We will also perform a walkover of the levee system to confirm available as-built/record drawings and assess the current physical condition. As part of the site visit we will identify site access for supplemental explorations, evaluate site access for levee remediation construction, and identify potential locations for levee stability analyses. Deliverable: Meeting minutes. 2. Review of Existing Documentation and Levee History: We will review available documentation of the levee system. We assume the documentation will consist of: • Reports and records of levee performance during high water events (instances of erosion, sloughing, seepage, overtopping, etc.) • As-built drawings for the original levee and/or repairs, as available • Levee design reports or memoranda and design computations, if available • Levee construction reports, data, specifications, if available • Current survey information, including topographic map with 1-foot contours and available surveyed cross-sections of the river channel and levee • Records and data regarding existing stormwater outfalls and any other utility crossings including those in the City of Tukwila • Recent USACE Annual and Periodic Inspection reports • Regional and site-specific geology reports, aerial imagery,test boring logs and other geologic or geotechnical data along or adjacent to the levee, soil testing data, foundation material characteristics, and inferred stratigraphy • Electronic data files for all borings and cone penetration tests included in the GeoEngineers' Stability and Certification Report dated October 24, 2011 • Groundwater studies, including logs and water levels from wells in the vicinity of the levee • Information on repairs or upgrades made to the levee system by the Corps, King County Flood Control Zone District, City of Kent, and any other entity plus records of permits for any alterations made to the levee since its construction (such as changes to the levee cross-section, construction or abandonment of utilities, and bridges over the levee) • Current operations and maintenance manual for nearby levee reaches • Operation and maintenance records We assume the City will search and assemble any available data and provide it to us. We assume our review will be limited to documents provided to us by the City. The goals of the review will be to (1) develop an understanding of the levee system,typical levee sections, foundation conditions, and historic performance of the system, (2) identify areas of potential erosion, seepage or stability concern, and (3) identify areas where additional information is desired. Deliverable: List of documents reviewed. A list of relevant documents will be included in the 4 Mr. Ken Langholz January 27, 2012 FEMA Accreditation Report, which is a deliverable under Task 8. 3. Supplemental Subsurface Explorations: We will perform a supplemental subsurface exploration program to refine the characterization of the levee and foundation materials and aid in the engineering evaluation of the levee system. Geotechnical test borings will be used to supplement existing historic soil data, verify embankment and foundation material composition, establish stratigraphy along the levee alignment, and establish more detailed data at representative cross-sections for geotechnical analyses. Geotechnical test borings will be completed through the existing levee embankment where possible or along the landside toe of the embankment in areas of restricted access. We understand that no Field Exploration Work Plan will be required. We assume we will drill up to six conventional borings at depths up to 60 feet each to supplement the existing information. We have assumed that drill cuttings can be dispersed over the ground next to the drill hole and raked in with the surficial soil. Off-site disposal of cutting is not included. We will transport soil samples to a laboratory for index testing on selected samples. The number, depths, and technique for the borings may change after a more detailed review of historic information, observations made during our site visit, and the observations made during the drilling program. We have not included a geophysical survey as part of this scope of work. A geophysical survey along the levee crest may be beneficial to generalize the foundation stratigraphy between boring locations, identify potential anomalies (such as buried former river channels, abandoned meanders, abandoned pipes), and identify locations where additional borings may be desirable to better assess levee foundation conditions. If based on the progress of our exploration we conclude that a geophysical survey would be appropriate we will advise you and would prepare a contract modification for your approval. We have not included test pit excavations along the levee alignment. Test pits might be necessary to supplement existing geotechnical information or evaluate the presence of buried items such as pipes or selected levee components such as toe drains and impervious blankets if any exist. If based on the progress of our exploration we conclude that a limited number of test pits would be appropriate we will advise you and would prepare a contract modification for your approval. We will perform a limited geotechnical laboratory testing on soil samples collected during the subsurface exploration program. The laboratory testing will include primarily grain-size analyses and Atterberg limits testing to aid in soil classification and development of engineering parameters for levee evaluation. Lastly, we understand an assessment of the existing outfall pipes will not be needed. Accordingly we have excluded inspection subcontract costs from our estimate. 5 Mr. Ken Langholz January 27, 2012 In the preparation of our scope, we have assumed that the City will facilitate the work by performing the following activities: • Facilitate timely entry to all areas of the project for site visit and exploration purposes. Our current scope does not include establishing right-of-entry agreements or other right- of-way services. • Obtain City and/or County permits (if any are needed)for explorations, including any permits needed for explorations to be performed in Tukwila. • Obtain all necessary environmental clearances (if any are needed)for the proposed exploration sites and activities. We will prepare a Geotechnical Data Memorandum to summarize the results of our subsurface explorations. Information in this memorandum will include: • Geologic mapping • Summary of previous geotechnical field investigations and laboratory testing • Summary of current geotechnical field investigations and laboratory testing • Boring and cone penetration test logs • Field testing results • Laboratory testing results, and • Review of the CCTV inspection video and logs prepared by others. Deliverable: Geotechnical Data Memorandum 4. Survey Coordination—For purposes of this study, topographic information will be necessary for the existing levee and adjacent land surfaces (river bank and land east of the levee). Based on our conversations with the City, we understand that survey data will be provided to us by the City. Accordingly, our scope does not include mapping and survey services. We anticipate the following information will be needed and will be provided by the City in a timely manner: • Topographic map with 1-foot contours of the Green River channel, levee and ground surface in the area behind the levee. • Available representative cross-sections showing river channel (including below water bathymetry), river bank, levee, and land surface landside of the levee to a distance of at least 100 feet beyond the landside levee toe. • Selected additional cross-sections as needed to identify critical (steepest) slopes of river bank and levee. • Embankment crest elevations at a spacing of 500 feet or closer to support the freeboard evaluation. Crest elevations need to have an accuracy of 0.1 feet or better. • As-drilled locations of all subsurface explorations completed by GEI. • Bathymetric survey at selected cross-sections along outer bends as used by NHC for evaluation of bend and long term scour risk in the project reach. This survey data will be reviewed for use in stability calculations. Deliverable: None 6 Mr. Ken Langholz January 27, 2012 5. EnLineerine Evaluations- We will perform engineering evaluations to address the requirements established in 44 CFR 65.10 (b). These will include the following: Task 5.1 -44 CFR 65.10 (b) (1) Freeboard In general, FEMA regulation 44 CFR 65.10(b) (1) requires that riverine levees provide the following freeboard for the base flood (1-percent-annual-chance flood): • A minimum freeboard of three feet above the water-surface level of the base flood. • An additional one foot above the minimum is required within 100 feet in either side of structures (such as bridges) riverward of the levee or wherever the flow is constricted. • An additional one-half foot above the minimum at the upstream end of the levee is also required, tapering to not less than the minimum at the downstream end of the levee. However, paragraph 44 CFR 65.10 (b) (1) (ii) allows a freeboard less than 3 feet(but not less than 2 feet)where appropriate engineering analysis demonstrates adequate protection considering various sources of uncertainty in the base flood elevation. We understand that NHC has performed a risk-based analysis that demonstrates that,for the Briscoe/Desimone levee, a freeboard of 2 feet provides greater than 90% assurance of containing the 1% annual chance flood. Based on FEMA's review comments on the CLOMR submittals already made by the City of Kent, we understand that FEMA will accept the proposed freeboard reduction from 3 feet to 2 feet for this levee reach. Using NHC's water surface profile for the 1-percent-annual- chance flood, we will estimate Base Flood Elevations at 500-foot intervals along the flood control system. At each interval, we will evaluate the Base Flood Elevation against the elevation of the levee crest as determined by the levee crest survey to be provided by the City (Task 4). We will prepare a Freeboard Evaluation Memorandum. In this memorandum we will explain our methodology, document the evaluations performed, and summarize the results in a table. Deliverable: Freeboard Evaluation Memorandum. Task 5.2-44 CFR 65.10 (b) (2) Closures FEMA regulation 44 CFR 65.10 (b) (2) requires that all openings in the levee system be provided with closure devices that are structural parts of the system during operation and designed according to sound engineering practices. We understand that the only openings on the system are stormwater outfalls and that their inlets are above the BFE. We will review existing information to confirm that the outfalls do not require closures. Deliverable: None 7 Mr. Ken Langholz January 27, 2012 Task 5.3-44 CFR 65.10 (b) (3) Embankment Protection FEMA regulation 44 CFR 65.10 (b) (3) requires that an engineering analysis be submitted that demonstrates that no appreciable erosion of the levee embankment can be expected during the Base Flood and that anticipated erosion will not result in failure of the levee embankment or foundation directly or indirectly through reduction of the seepage path and subsequent instability. The current embankment protection will be evaluated against potential erosion caused by the Base Flood. The factors to be addressed in such analysis include, but are not limited to: • Expected flow velocities (especially in constricted areas) • Duration of flooding at various stages and velocities • Embankment and foundation materials • Levee alignment, bends, and transitions • Wind and wave action • Levee side slopes, and • Slope protection techniques We understand that NHC, under direct contract to the City, has already developed information on scour, stream velocities, and appropriate bank protection for the levee reach, including but not limited to the following items: • General, local, and bend scour evaluation -thalweg profiles and cross-sections over time including recent bathymetric data, stability of thalweg location and channel shape, calculation of estimated bend scour depths at approach and exit sections, and scour recommendations. • Bank velocities and slope protection recommendations. We will review the investigation of historic erosion trends as documented in the NHC technical memos and other available documents. We will review the NHC memos, work with NHC to resolve any comments, and include the NHC work products in the FEMA Accreditation Report prepared under Task 8 to explain the methodology, document the evaluations performed, and summarize the results. Active (if any) and potential erosion sites will be identified and located on a map of appropriate scale to clearly show the reaches of the levee that may require erosion remediation. Deliverable: None - The NHC Technical Memorandum will be included in the FEMA Accreditation Report prepared under Task 8. Task 5.4-44 CFR 65.10 (b) (4) Embankment and Foundation Stability Analyses FEMA regulation 44 CFR 65.10 (b) (4) requires that an engineering analysis of the levee embankment stability be submitted. We will perform embankment stability and seepage analyses on up to six different generalized cross-sections. We will select cross-sections based on the range of levee configurations and foundation conditions. 8 Mr. Ken Langholz January 27, 2012 We will perform seepage analyses in general accordance with the procedures outlined in the following Corps documents: EM 1110-2-1913,Design and Construction of Levees, and ETL 1110-2-569 Design Guidance for Levee Underseepage. Our seepage analyses will focus on through-seepage and underseepage. We will perform slope stability analyses in general accordance with the procedures outlined in EM 1110-2-1913,Design and Construction ofLevees and EM 1110-2-1902, Slope Stability. Our slope stability analyses will focus on the steady-state seepage, rapid drawdown, and seismic cases. We will produce an Embankment and Foundation Stability Memorandum. This memorandum will explain our methodology, document selection of geotechnical parameters, document calculations performed, and summarize the results. Deliverable: Embankment and Foundation Stability Memorandum. Task 5.5-44 CFR 65.10 (b) (5) Settlement Analyses FEMA regulation 44 CFR 65.10 (b) (5) requires that an engineering analysis be submitted that assesses the potential and magnitude of future losses of freeboard as a result of settlement. We understand that the levee foundation soils generally consist of interbedded alluvial sands, and silts. The foundation soils are generally not considered highly compressible with the possible exception of thick layers of silt. The foundation materials are relatively pervious, and the majority of settlement from levee construction or levee modifications would likely have occurred during construction or shortly thereafter. Therefore, we do not consider settlement to be a significant issue for FEMA Accreditation. We will perform a settlement analysis at one generalized cross section of the levee that will be conservatively representative of the levee as a whole. We will produce a settlement evaluation memorandum that will outline our calculations and development of soil parameters. Deliverable: Settlement Evaluation Memorandum. Task 5.6-44 CFR 65.10 (b) (6)Interior Drainage FEMA regulation 44 CFR 65.10 (b) (6) requires that an analysis be submitted that identifies the source(s) of interior flooding, the extent of the flooded area, and, if the average depth is greater than one foot, the water-surface elevations(s) of the Base Flood. This analysis must be based on the joint probability of interior and exterior flooding and the capacity of facilities (such as drainage lines)for evacuating interior flood-waters. We understand that NHC, under direct contract to the City, has completed an evaluation of the interior drainage in general accordance with the applicable provisions of EM 1110-2-1413, Interior Drainage. This consists of a visual assessment of interior drainage components, 9 Mr. Ken Langholz January 27, 2012 hydrologic modeling of the drainage area, hydraulic modeling of system components, and mapping of areas of potential ponding. NHC modeled the levee as providing 100-year flood protection by modifying the FLO-21) model previously developed by NHC for King County's appeal of the FEMA Green River floodplain mapping. The 100-year floodplain boundary was remapped for the portions of the Green River that change due to the levee providing accredited 100-year flood protection. We understand NHC has conducted an interior drainage analysis. Inundation mapping from interior drainage results was merged with the overall workmap to be submitted to FEMA. Deliverables: None. We anticipate the following NHC deliverables will be included in the FEMA Accreditation Report prepared under Task 8: • Interior Drainage Evaluation Memorandum documenting methods and results of the hydraulic analysis • Digital versions of effective and revised FLO-21)models and the digital model output data used in the analysis • Revised floodplain mapping(in digital format) showing inundation areas, flood zones and floodway 6. Operations and Maintenance Manual Review—We will work with City staff in preparing the draft O&M Manual for this levee reach. To achieve compliance with the requirements of 44 CFR 65.10 we propose to use a model for the Operations and Maintenance (O&M) Manual for the levee based on the O&M Manual already prepared for adjacent levee reaches. GEI will use the model developed for the SR516 to S. 231"Way levee reach as a starting point. We will update and/or modify the model and supplement missing or inapplicable information. We assume the City will provide the needed figures and maps. Operating instructions for interior drainage systems, if any, would be developed by NHC, who is responsible for the interior drainage evaluations. We will assemble this input and provide a draft of the O&M Manual to the City. Deliverable: Draft O&M Manual for compliance with 44 CFR 65.10. 7. Conceptual Design to Address Deficiency—We anticipate our evaluations will identify deficiencies that would preclude FEMA accreditation of the levee without modification. We will develop conceptual designs for proposed levee modifications that would bring the levee into compliance with FEMA criteria. The modified levee cross-section will be analyzed for the relevant compliance criteria(e.g., stability, settlement, and erosion potential) and the analysis will be documented as appropriate. We understand that the City will then use the recommended conceptual design to develop detailed designs and construction plans, specifications and cost estimates. GEI will review the City's plans and provide comments. For purposes of preparing the cost estimate, we have assumed that the deficient areas requiring remediation will be approximately the same as those identified by GeoEngineers in their Stability and Certification Report. We anticipate that the bulk of the work in this task will consist of confirming or refining the extent of the levee reaches identified by GeoEngineers as needing remediation and confirming or refining the sheetpile wall design proposed by 10 Mr. Ken Langholz January 27, 2012 GeoEngineers. If the identified deficiencies are more extensive than anticipated and require additional analysis and design effort, we understand that the additional scope and associated budget would be added by contract modification subject to our presentation of written justification. Deliverables: Recommended conceptual design for levee cross-section modification to address identified deficiency 8. FEMA Accreditation Report- The results of our and NHC's evaluations will be presented in a FEMA Accreditation Report. The report will include sections addressing the requirements in 44 CFR 65.10 including freeboard, closures, embankment protection, embankment and foundation stability, settlement, interior drainage, operations plans, and maintenance plans. We will attach the evaluation memorandums described in Subtasks 5.1 through 5.6 as appendices to the report. A draft copy of the report will be distributed to the City of Kent for review and comment. We have assumed one round of comments and revisions. We will incorporate the City's comments into the final report. We will prepare five copies of the final report for distribution to the City(4 copies) and FEMA(1 copy). Deliverables: Draft FEMA Accreditation Report for City Review Final FEMA Accreditation Report 9. Proiect Management and Coordination -Project management and coordination are essential to ensure the successful preparation of the levee accreditation documentation. Successful implementation will require effective oral and written communications and coordination. The project management task will include the following activities: • Coordination of project activities with City staff • Management and supervision of the engineering team • Management, coordination and evaluation of subconsultant services • Project progress and coordination meetings • Documentation of key meetings • Coordination of meetings and reviews with King County and Corps of Engineers • Preparation of monthly summaries of current financial information and schedule Management of Quality Control activities will also be included in this task, including the review, coordination and checking of work products at each step of their development. Work products include the key deliverables and support documentation, such as work plans, technical memoranda, and reports. The QC team will review technical approaches and verify that deliverables and supporting documents prepared for the City are complete, conform to standards, and meet or exceed the expectations of the City and GEI's management. The project manager will be responsible for the assurance that these procedures are being implemented. For cost estimating purposes, the project schedule assumes a duration of approximately three months for this task. 11 Mr. Ken Langholz January 27, 2012 Deliverables: Schedule; Monthly progress reports COST ESTIMATE We will perform the above scope of service on a time and materials basis based on the attached Fee Schedule and Payment Terms. Based on the information known to us, we estimate that the cost of performing the services outlined above will be $284,883. A breakdown of the estimated costs is included in the attached table. Invoices will be submitted monthly based on the services performed as of the end of each billing period. Payment will be due within 45 days per the terms of the City of Kent agreement as negotiated by the City of Kent and GEI Consultants. This estimate does not include any contingency. We understand that additional budget to address changes and unforeseen complications that require additional effort would be added by contract modification subject to our presentation of written justification. SCHEDULE We are prepared to begin work upon receiving a Notice to Proceed (NTP). Assuming a NTP of January 30, 2012, we anticipate completing the scope outlined above within the following schedule: Task Anticipated Task Start/Finish 1 Project Kickoff Meeting and Site Visit 1/30/2012—2/3/2012 2 Review of Existing Data 1/30/2012—2/17/2012 3 Subsurface Explorations 2/8/2012—3/16/2012 4 Survey 1/30/2012—2/17/2012 5 Engineering Evaluations 1/30/2012 —3/30/2012 6 O&M Manual Review 2/20/2012 —3/16/2012 7 Conceptual Design to Address Deficiency 2/17/2012—3/30/2012 8 FEMA Accreditation Report 3/5/2012—4/27/2012 9 Project Management 1/30/2012—4/27/2012 Notes: (1)We will target a date no later than mid March to confirm or refine the extent of the levee reaches identified by GeoEngineers as needing remediation and the proposed sheetpile wall design. The final two weeks of this period will be needed to finalize analysis and technical memorandum. (2) Date listed is for submission of Draft report to the City. We appreciate the opportunity to submit this proposal and look forward to working with you on this project. Please call me at 510-350-2908 or Jim Nickerson at 781-721-4023 with any questions. 12 Mr. Ken Langholz January 27, 2012 Sincerely, GEI CONSULTANTS, INC. P&gr Alberto Pujol, P.E. Vice President, Project Manager Attachments: GEI Fee Schedule and Payment Terms Cost Estimate 13 FEE SCHEDULE Hourly Billing Rate Personnel Category $ per hour Staff Professional —Grade 1 $ 96 Staff Professional —Grade 2 $ 106 Project Professional—Grade 3 $ 116 Project Professional—Grade 4 $ 130 Senior Professional —Grade 5 $ 154 Senior Professional —Grade 6 $ 175 Senior Professional —Grade 7 $ 208 Senior Consultant—Grade 8 $ 234 Senior Consultant—Grade 9 $ 288 Senior Principal—Grade 10 $ 288 ------ --------- ---------- -------- -------- ------ Senior CADD Drafter and Designer $ 116 CADD Drafter/Designer and Senior Technician $ 106 Technician, Word Processor, Administrative Staff $ 86 Office Aide $ 68 These rates are billed for both regular and overtime hours in all categories. Rates will increase up to 5% annually, at GEI's option, for all contracts that extend beyond twelve (12)months after the date of the contract. OTHER PROJECT COSTS Subconsultants, Subcontractors and Other Project Expenses - All costs for subconsultants, subcontractors and other project expenses will be billed at cost plus a 15% service charge. Examples of such expenses ordinarily charged to projects are subcontractors; subconsultants: chemical laboratory charges; rented or leased field and laboratory equipment; outside printing and reproduction; communications and mailing charges;reproduction expenses; shipping costs for samples and equipment; disposal of samples; rental vehicles; fares for travel on public carvers; special fees for insurance certificates, permits, licenses, etc.; fees for restoration of paving or land due to field exploration, etc.; state sales and use taxes and state taxes on GEI fees. Billing Rates for Specialized Technical Computer Programs—Computer usage for specialized technical programs will be billed at a flat rate of$10.00 per hour in addition to the labor required to operate the computer. Field and Laboratory Equipment Billing Rates — GEI-owned field and laboratory equipment such as pumps, sampling equipment, monitoring instrumentation, field density equipment, portable gas chromatography, etc. will be billed at a daily,weekly,or monthly rate,as needed for the project. Expendable supplies are billed at a unit rate. Transportation and Subsistence -Automobile expenses for GEI or employee owned cars will be charged at the rate per mile set by the Internal Revenue Service for tax purposes plus tolls and parking charges. When required for a project, four-wheel drive vehicles owned by GEI or the employees will be billed at a daily rate appropriate for those vehicles. Per diem living costs for personnel on assignment away from their home office will be negotiated for each proj ect. PAYMENTTERMS Invoices will be submitted monthly or upon completion of a specified scope of service, as described in the accom- panying contract(proposal,project,or agreement document that is signed and dated by GEI and CLIENT). Payment is due upon receipt of the invoice. Interest will accrue at the rate of 1% of the invoice amount per month, for amounts that remain unpaid more than 30 days after the invoice date. All payments will be made by either check or electronic transfer to the address specified by GEI and will include reference to GEI's invoice number. o o m o u ........... o o . ...... ... ... o o o 0 U go 0< m > m E T > m ol m .0 E m I o .0 o I E o E u u I > 1. =o Im m 2 0 > m ol =m -o 0 0 =o m I I E o > u o 44 > �Q . � �,m u E C L= m � � m ' ' ' o o o I m W L� E E I o o w T 0 =0 0 > 0 Q u 0 0 0 0 T w > u o < 0 u m 0 0 m u 0 > Im � � j� = m 0 E 0 >1 m 0 fi� omu M X X X E 1�L�j M U E U E > 2- o o -0=> ow > > > 0 0 > 0 0 > 0 mx mx > =0 =0 o > / // / �, � , 2 j \ KENT Agenda Item: Consent Calendar - 7M TO: City Council DATE: February 21, 2012 SUBJECT: PACE Engineers Contract for James Street Pump Station Upgrades - Authorize MOTION: Authorize the Mayor to sign a Consultant Services Agreement with PACE Engineers, Inc., for civil, geotechnical, and electrical services for the James street pump station in an amount not to exceed $58,187, subject to final terms and conditions acceptable to the City Attorney and Public Works Director. SUMMARY: The City's James street stormwater pump station is located just north of James street near Woodford Ave. N., and needs upgrading. PACE Engineers, Inc., was selected to design the pump station. This new pump station will help alleviate the local flooding of James Street at Mill Creek. Pump station designs are highly specialized work. City staff does not possess the specialized skills or licenses to perform this work. EXHIBITS: Scope of Work RECOMMENDED BY: Public Works Committee BUDGET IMPACTS: This contract is budgeted and will be paid through the stormwater utility. . w L IIJI I I f I S I PI,III ara 1 Surveyors IIII� lI[ If?inenhnq t,v¢f.COmpe ny February 1.0, 2012 Ms. Kelly Casteel, Design Engineering Supervisor City of Kent Public Works 400 West Gowe St. Kent, WA 98032 Subject: !Cent James Street Stormw✓ater Pump Station Proposal for Professional civil Engineering Services (Revised) Dear Kelly: Per our discussion this afternoon, I have modified our draft proposal for the scope of work and associated design cost for the James Street Pump Station. Based upon our understanding of the project, PACE Engineers, Inc is pleased to submit this proposed scope of work and fee for your approval. Project Understanding An existing pump station located at the Mill Creek culvert crossing of James Street is designed to address local flooding from the tributary sub-basin. During low flows the tributary area currently drains to Mill Creek by gravity. During periods of high flow within Mill Creek this area is too low to drain by gravity to Mill Creek and the flows from the tributary area are pumped by a single vertical turbine pump into Mill Creek. The tributary sub-basin to the James Street pump station is approximately 4.9 acres in size, and generates approximately 2,700 gpm peak stormwater flows during the 100-year return frequency storm event. The City is looking at upgrading this system to a new duplex wet well pump station that would discharge to a new forcemain constructed along Central Avenue/James Street which would convey the flows to the Green fiver. The new system would continue to allow low flows to drain by gravity to Mill Creek. It is anticipated the that new duplex wet well pump station would consist of two (2) vertical turbine pumps, each pump capable of handling a flow rate of 2,700 gpm (the City would like a similar design to that of the Foster Park Pump Station project). PACE will base our design around this general configuration. A new manhole will be installed over the existing pipe feeding the existing wet well. A new intake line will feed the proposed 10-foot diameter wet well and a new discharge line will convey the storm water to the City's new forcemain for discharge to the river. It is our understanding that the City will be extending this forcemain to the James Street Pump Station site under a separate project. It is also our understanding that the City is proposing to acquire the parcel of land 'immediately to the north of the existing pump PACE Ir.ngi nffmI Inc. 11l55 IIIfIIintl WILY Sint( 300 f IIIfkIantl, WA (18033 P 42 .827.2014 1 ( 425,827_sons p n ce e n 9 rs.c n if F119IIlUUf6 I PIs)111Qf5 I Sll i'V 0 y III S City of Kent February 10, 2012 Page 2 station. This parcel is intended to be used for the above grade shelters. The City under a separate contract is proposing to demo the existing structure and raise the site 3 to 4 feet. The City will provide to PACE the proposed finished ground elevation of this parcel. These above grade facilities will consist of three canopy structures designed to protect equipment and personnel during bad weather. One structure will cover the two exterior pumps, a second will cover the electrical control panels and the third will cover a new generator. This proposal does not include a sound attenuation enclosure around the pumps or generator. If a sound attenuation enclosure is required the scope and budget would need to be adjusted accordingly. Assumptions ® AutoCAD files of the site survey will be provided by the City to PACE. ® AutoCAD files of the new forcemain along James Street will be provided to PACE. • PACE will design a new discharge line to the right-of-way of James St for connection to the James Street forcemain. ® PACE will not be required to perform any survey of the site. • System Interface will provide a separate budget for programming during the construction phase. • City to prepare contract documents with PACE providing additions to the special provisions as required. ® All permitting will be done by the City. Scope of Services A detailed proposal consisting of six (6) tasks follows. This proposal includes necessary civil, geotechnical, and electrical services through the design phase of this project. PACE will be the prime consultant for the entire Scope of Work and will oversee and administer this Scope of Work. PACE will complete all civil engineering services in-house. PACE will subcontract with Follett Engineering for electrical engineering and Systems Interface for communication and controls. A soils engineer will be required to take one boring sample at the location of the proposed wet well to determine soil stability. Based upon our discussions we have not included any survey on this project. If during the course of the project survey services are required, the scope and budget would need to be modified accordingly. We anticipate starting this work immediately and proceeding on a preliminary layout to submit to the City for review. The estimated cost for this work $58,187 to be paid on a time and expense basis. SCOPE OF WORK Task 1— Preliminary and Final Dump Station Design This task includes preparing preliminary and final drawings of the proposed improvements to submit to the City for review and comment. This work includes: L Determine if 1-phase or 3-phase power is available at the site. This will be used as the 0, 'C H ,`,URWY`;U"I'IIRVI Y BlA-LSI' P I IAITO) ,d0 M[K VV p,I I LA `;hor I I, A,c � Engineers I PIannert, I Surveyors City of Kent February 10, 2.012 Page 3 basis for the 30% design. 2. Site layout including location of pump station, bypass manhole, control panels, fencing, and generator. 3. Design details of new pump station and bypass manhole. 4. Design details of fencing, piping, fittings, valves, and recirculation line. 5. Traffic control and TESCP sheets. 6. Submit 30%, 90% and 100% project documents for City staff reviews, comments and approval. Submit three sets for each review. 7. Begin permit coordination with regulatory agencies (if required). S. Prepare budget-level construction cost estimate for each submittal. 9. Review the hydraulics of the Central Avenue forcemain. In particular the need for an air vacuum release assembly. This review will also include an evaluation on the Phase 2 forcemain design to see if it would advantageous to the pump station design to upsize the forcemain from 18-inch HDPE to 24-inch HDPE. Task 2 — Electrical plans and Specifications PACE sub-consultants Follett Engineering and Systems Interface (SI) will prepare plans and specifications associated with the electrical requirements. Follett Engineering will provide plans and specifications for site power needs. The first order of work will be to determine which phase of power is available at the site. SI will provide plans and specifications for communication and controls. SI will follow up by being the City's integrator on the project. Both sub-consultants have worked together on similar projects with PACE and are both working with the City on the Foster Park Pump Station project. We have included SI's proposal for your information. At this time we are including SI's Phase I work only within our proposal. PACE will gladly modify our proposal to include additional SI phases if requested by the City. Task 3 -- project Management/Coordination/Meetings PACE will provide administration and coordination of the project. The following items are included in this task: 1. Attend coordination meetings with the City as required. For budgetary purposes 16 hours have been allotted for meetings. Since the amount of meeting time is not under, our control, any time in excess of the budgeted 8 hours will be billed on a time and material basis. 2. Conduct a field reconnaissance of site and other facilities with the design team and City staff. 3. Coordination with subconsultants. 4. In-house project administration, scheduling, and direction of design team staff. 5. Preparation of monthly progress reports Task 4 — Contract Document preparation We anticipate the City taking the lead on the contract documents and modifying the Foster Park O:,"CC,'f A`IIRVFYVQ 91YANILYIf',1 A J PLAT P09 60 11uK M ,B I A P, SUurt ICI noc u1 Engineers k PIaoner5 6urveyo rs City of Kent February 10, 2012 Page 4 Pump Station project specifications to meet the requirements of this project. We anticipate the City will incorporate our Special Provisions" within their specifications. It is assumed that the City will advertise, open bids and award the project with support from PACE. Task 5 —QA (Quality Assurance) In order to assure that the final plans and specifications are complete, accurate and appropriate, PACE will conduct a Quality Assurance review of the final documents prior to final (1.00%) submittal to the City. This review will be assigned to a senior level principal who has not been associated with the project. The review will consist of a complete sheet-by-sheet and contract document review to assure the City that the documents meet or exceed the "level of care" of our industry and are the highest quality possible. Task 6 — Construction Services (Optional Task) PACE is a full-service engineering and surveying company that will be pleased to provide the following construction services to the City of Kent in Support of this project if requested by the City. PACE proposes the following services during construction: 1. Bid assistance (City will advertise the project) 2. Construction management. 3. Construction surveying/staking 4. Construction inspection 5. Compaction testing 6. Shop drawing review 7. Progress payment processing 8. Record drawing preparation In summary, we have developed a scope of work based on our present knowledge of the proposed project. We have tried to cover all aspects of the proposed project; however, if you feel that additional areas of work require our attention, please don't hesitate to call. Again, we are pleased to submit this scope of work to accomplish the Civil Engineering tasks for this exciting and challenging project. We look forward to working with you. Sincerely, PACE Engineers, Inc. Ken Nilsen, P.E. Vice President Attachments 0 ,M OP ,I IRVEv',n 1,URVl Y I;IA I A'I"VGO) 160 HI..1K VY ,Is I A P,Snort P I.L,I rsmmo w o 0 0 0 0 o b o 0 0 o O O o hS 0 E- -- o W M3 If) - N ry p N N (Z1 N o N O O 0 o c m'- O N V O n U w � Q LZ m o 0o t o U E Il" N O N w a H. 9 O d O W � � N W a o o 0 m 0o bo o � o a E TR u O c s N p S] O 0 C c A 0. � N 0 N m o m o U N a = o u o in N N N NFU O N ER C A O O of O U C E � � m _ N (n O N W IIi m a @ o v 7 � � N Z m m o Ip Y O m O 9 G p c IP1 lL N Q N fA J 2 .O p o .' o o N o o =o a d Ul(J m ; s N s s s in o I- N W KENT Agenda Item: Consent Calendar - 7N TO: City Council DATE: February 21, 2012 SUBJECT: AECOM Technical Services, Inc., Contract for Horseshoe Bend Retaining Walls Structural Engineering - Authorize MOTION: Authorize the Mayor to sign a contract with AECOM Technical Services Inc., in an amount not to exceed $49,142.28, for structural engineering for levee retaining walls on the Horseshoe Bend Levee, subject to final terms and conditions acceptable to the City Attorney and Public Works Director. SUMMARY: As part of the certification of the Horseshoe Bend levee, the City must construct a secondary levee along a portion of the east and west ends of the Horseshoe Bend. In most areas the levee consists of an earthen berm or a raised roadway embank- ment. However, in areas where there is limited space, a levee retaining wall will be constructed. These areas have been identified as being on the south side of S. 259th Street east of Central Ave. and on the west side north of the City's 3rd Ave storm pond on the north side of S. 259th Street. AECOM has been selected to provide structural engineering services for the levee retaining walls on the Horseshoe Bend levee. EXHIBITS: Scope of Work RECOMMENDED BY: Public Works Committee BUDGET IMPACTS: All costs for work included in this agreement will be billed to the Department of Ecology $10 million grant for the Horseshoe Bend Levee. City of Kent /Q ICOM Scope of Work-Exhibit A EXHIBIT A SCOPE OF WORK for Horseshoe Bend Retaining Walls The scope work is to provide final design services and contract documents for multiple retaining walls along the Horseshoe Bend Levee. The scope includes; analysis, design, drawing preparation, estimating, and specification language for the walls. The plans and specifications will be sealed and signed by a professional engineer upon completion of contract documents. Scope also includes coordination with City of Kent and other consultants working on this project. FINAL DESIGN The services listed below represent the Consultant's understanding of the work to be completed in order to provide bid documents to the City for advertisement of the Project. This scope of services is based on direction from the City. The Consultant shall actively coordinate Retaining Wall aspects of the work for the assignment, identify and resolve issues in a timely manner, and communicate effectively. The Consultant shall be responsible for the performance of scoped services, and shall furnish materials and information to accomplish the work tasks described herein. The Consultant will actively coordinate with other consultants performing work on this project. The Consultant and the City agree that the City may use City forces to perform tasks listed in this Scope and that some tasks may not be required and the contract dollar amount will be adjusted accordingly. I. PROJECT OBJECTIVES AND DESCRIPTION The objectives of the Horseshoe Levee Project, hereinafter referred to as the Project, are to: 1. Provide flood protection to the City of Kent, in the area of the Green River known as the Horseshoe Bend. 2. The project will include new berms and retaining walls. 3. Minimize construction impacts to the public. The Work consists of providing final design services for retaining walls along the Horseshoe Bend Levee. The City of Kent and the Consultant will choose wall types on a location by location basis. The height of the wall will be about three feet above the 500 year flood elevation. Consultant effort will include the following items: 1. Task Management and Coordination with City and other consultants 2. Site Visit for Designers 3. Analysis and Design for Sheet Pile wall 4. Plan Preparation for wall 5. Specifications for wall 6. Quantities and Opinion of Cost for wall 7. Compiling Deliverables 8. Responding to Review Comments 9. Bid Period Assistance Horseshoe Bend Sht Pile Walls Scope including A B 20120130 v0(2).docx Page 1 of 9 City of Kent ACOM Scope of Work-Exhibit A I, [I. DESIGN CRITERIA All documents prepared under the terms of this AGREEMENT shall be developed in accordance with the latest edition and amendments of the following: City of Kent: 1. Road Standards 2. Standard drawings and sample documents prepared by the City and furnished to the Consultant shall be used as a guide in all applicable cases WSDOT Publications: 1. Standard Specifications for Road, Bridge, and Municipal Construction, English Edition, 2008 (M41-10) 2. Standard Plans for Road, Bridge, and Municipal Construction, English edition (M21-01) 3. Design Manual (M22-01) 4. Bridge Design Manual, (M23-50) 5. Plans Preparation Manual (M22-31) 6. Construction Manual (M41-01) 7. Local Agency Guidelines Manual American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials(AASHTO)Publications: 1. Standard Specifications for Highway Bridges, AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications, Customary U.S. Units, 41h Edition with 2008 Interim Revisions 2. Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities, 1999 3. A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets, 5In Edition, 2004 (`Green Book') U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration (FHWA): 1. Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways USACE and Other Publications: 1. EC (Engineering Circular) 1110-2-6052, Structural Design of Precast and Prestressed Concrete for Offsite Prefabricated Construction of Hydraulic Structures, 1 January 2001 2. EM (Engineering Manual) 1110-2-2104, Strength Design for Reinforced Concrete Hydraulic Structures, August 2003, Change 1 3. EM 1110-2-2105, Design of Hydraulic Steel Structure, March 1993, Change 1, May 1994 4. EM 1110-2-2106, Design of Precast and Prestressed Concrete for Hydraulic Structures, 30 march 08, DRAFT 5. EM 1110-2-2503, Design of Sheet Pile Cellular Structures Cofferdams and Retaining Structures, September 1989 6. EM 1110-2-2504, Design of Sheet Pile Walls, March 1994 7. EM 1110-2-2906. Design of Pile Foundations, January 1991 8. ER (Engineering Regulations) 1110-2-1150, Engineering and Design for Civil Works Projects, August1999 1 9. ER 1110-2-1806, Earthquake Design and Evaluation for Civil Works Projects, July 1995 10. EC 1110-2-6066, Engineering and Design: Design of I-Walls Horseshoe Bend Sht Pile Walls Scope including A B 20120130 v0(2).docx Page 2 of 9 City of Kent AZWOM Scope of Work-Exhibit A 11. American Concrete Institute (ACI), Building Code Requirements for Reinforced Concrete, ACI 318- 02 12. American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC), Manual of Steel Construction Allowable Stress Design, 91h Edition, 1989 13. American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures, ASCE 7-05, 2005 14. American Welding Society (AWS), Bridge Welding Code, AWS D1.5 2008 15. American Welding Society, Structural Welding Code, AWS D1.1 2008 Ill. SCHEDULE Design deliverables will be submitted based on the following schedule: A. South 2591h St Wall & Gates Date Consultant Notice to Proceed _February 24, 2012 60% Calculations, Plans, Estimate, and Specifications _March 23, 2012 100% Calculations, Plans, Estimate, and Specifications _April 20, 2012 These dates are dependant upon final gate type selected by the City by the Notice to Proceed date i I B. South 2591h St Wall near Pond Date Consultant Notice to Proceed February 24, 2012 60% Calculations, Plans, Estimate, and Specifications _March 23, 2012 100% Calculations, Plans, Estimate, and Specifications _April 20, 2012 The duration of the reviews by the City and by others is two (2) weeks. The project schedule may be subject to adjustment at mutual agreement, whether initiated by the City or Consultant. IV. DATA AND SERVICES TO BE FURNISHED TO THE CONSULTANT BY THE CITY The City will provide the following items and services to the Consultant that will facilitate the studies and preparation of the documents for work within the limits of the Project. The Consultant is entitled to rely on the accuracy and completeness of this and other data furnished and represented by the City and others, including but not limited to, survey and traffic data. These are: 1. Survey, Base Maps, and complete DTM i 2. Plan and Elevation Drawings of Walls 3. Geotechnical Design Parameters i 4. Drainage/Hydraulic Information as necessary 5. Secure rights-of-entry as necessary Horseshoe Bend Sht Pile Walls Scope including A 13 20120930 v0(2).docx Page 3 of 9 '.. City of Kent A.TCOM Scope of Work-Exhibit A V. INTELECTUAL PROPERTY The documents listed as "Deliverables" in the Detailed Task Description, Section VII of this scope of work, and other exhibits or presentations for the work covered by this AGREEMENT and associated supplements will be furnished by the Consultant to the City upon completion of the various tasks of work. Whether the documents are submitted in electronic media or in tangible format, any use of the materials on another project or on extensions of this project beyond the use for which they were intended, or any modification of the materials or conversion of the materials to an alternate system or format will be without liability or legal exposure to Consultant. The City will assume all risks associated with such use, modifications, or conversions. The Consultant may remove from the electronic materials delivered to the City, all references to the Consultant involvement and will retain a tangible copy of the materials delivered to the City which will govern the interpretation of the materials and the information recorded. Electronic files are considered working files only; the Consultant is not required to maintain electronic files beyond 90 days after the project final billing, and makes no warranty as to the viability of electronic files beyond 90 days from date of transmittal. VI. ABBREVIATIONS The following abbreviations are referred to throughout this scope of work: AASHTO American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials BA Biological Assessment BDM WSDOT Bridge Design Manual BRAC Bridge Replacement Advisory Committee DAHP Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation Ecology Washington State Department of Ecology ECS Environmental Classification Summary ESA Endangered Species Act FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency FHWA Federal Highway Administration H&LP Highways and Local Programs HPA Hydraulic Project Approval JARPA Joint Aquatic Resources Permit Application -RFD Load Resistance Factor Design NEPA National Environmental Protection Act NMFS National Marine Fisheries Service NRHP National Register of Historic Places PS&E Plans, specifications, and estimates SEPA State Environmental Protection Act TS&L Type, Size and Location WDFW Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife WSDOT Washington State Department of Transportation Horseshoe Bend Sht Pile Walls Scope including A B 20120130 v0(2).docx Page 4 of 9 City of Kent AXOM Scope of Work-Exhibit A USACE United States Army Corps of Engineers USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service VII.DETAILED TASK DESCRIPTION General Assumptions: 1. The level of effort for each task of work is limited to the amount of labor and expenses indicated in Exhibit'Bx" These costs are itemized in Exhibit'Bx"to aid in project tracking purposes only. The budget may be transferred between tasks, provided the total contracted amount is not exceeded. Additional services beyond these limits will be considered Extra Work. Walls included in this scope are: A. Exhibit Bf— South 259(" Street Wall, with Flood Gates B. Exhibit B2— South 259 h Wall near Pond 2. Substantial completion of the project is anticipated to be 4 months after Notice to Proceed. The Consultant is responsible for meeting deadlines for their tasks only; Consultant has no control over those portions of the schedule related to the tasks performed by the City or any third party. 3. Subsurface investigation and remedial action associated with hazardous wastes located within the Project limits are not within this scope of services. No hazardous, dangerous, or contaminated soil/ground water is anticipated to be encountered on or within the project limits. Should any of these materials be encountered, addressing the situation will be Extra Work. 4. The analyses, design, plans, specifications, and estimate performed or prepared as part of the Project will be in English units. Metric units will not be used on this Project 5. The plans will be prepared in accordance with City of Kent Drafting Standards including City of Kent Title Block and Pen/Plot Settings. Final plans shall be stamped and signed and provided to the City in AutoCAD format and on full-size hard copy(22"x 34). 6. The City has the authority to approve proposed work scope and schedule changes. Task 1. — Management and Coordination: In this task are described those services necessary to plan, perform, and control the various elements of the project so that the needs and expectations of the City will be met. a. Project Management. Provide direction to the design team. Conduct project coordination meetings as required with appropriate task leaders. Monitor the planned versus actual rate of expenditure for each task and take corrective actions if necessary. Collect from each task leader, the percent complete as measured by how much work is left to be accomplished on a task by task basis. Maintain a high exposure to the project team of the issues to be resolved and their potential impacts to the measures of success for the project. b. Communicate Progress. Conduct ongoing, proactive, responsive communications with the City staff involved in the direction and execution of the project. Attend project coordination meeting at the completion of the Design Memo. Coordinate the schedule of the reviews to be performed by the City. Prepare and submit monthly invoices with a brief progress report that will include identification of work performed in the previous month's schedule. c. Quality Assurance/Quality Control. The project manager will implement and conduct AECOM quality control/quality assurance program throughout the project. Horseshoe Bend Sht Pile Walls Scope including 13 20120130 v0(2).docx Page 5 of 9 City of Kent AZCOM Scope of Work-Exhibit A Assumptions: 1. The Consultant's project manager and/or project engineer will meet with the City's project manager/engineer on as needed basis throughout the project. 2. Internal project team coordination meetings will be held on an as-needed basis during project duration. These meetings will be in addition to the coordination meetings held with the City, but budgeted as part of the specific work tasks. 3. Project meetings may involve other consultants, FEMA and USACE and will require some preparation of meeting materials. The budgeted number of meetings is shown on the attached cost estimate. Deliverables: 1. Monthly Invoices and Progress Report(1 copy) i 2. Written Change Authorizations 3. Meeting preparation and attendance Task 2.— Site Visit: The Consultant will perform the following: The Consultant will conduct a site visit to review the field location of the proposed wall location. Assumptions: 4. All locations are accessible by foot. 5. Two people for the site visit Deliverables: 1. Field notes and photographs. Task 3. — Conceptual Wall Type Review: The Consultant will perform the following: Perform preliminary engineering to review the selected wall type, size and location, and determine how to provide aesthetic treatment to wall face. a. Establish wall design parameters, which include design loadings, construction materials, and design method. b. Coordinate with the City and geotechnical engineer for design parameters and an agreeable concept for providing aesthetically pleasing concrete facing to both sides of the expected steel sheet pile wall. Assumptions: 1. The anticipated structure type will vary depending on wall location. The aesthetic treatment for the wall facing must be developed and agreed to by the City and the Consultant. Standard form liner treatments are anticipated. Deliverables: 1. Typical section for the chosen wall with facing shown. Task 4. — Structural Design: The Consultant will analyze, design, and prepare plans, details, and specifications for the wall in accordance with City and WSDOT requirements as follows: a. Prepare complete structural calculations for the final design of the wall to be depicted on the plans. A registered Structural Engineer in the State of Washington will seal the cover sheet of the Horseshoe Bend Sht Pile Walls Scope including A B 20120130 v0(2).docx Page 6 of 9 City of Kent AXOM Scope of Work-Exhibit A structural calculations. The structural calculations shall include, but are not limited to the following: • Calculations for hydraulic and earth retaining analysis. • Analysis of member strength and stresses for critical stages of construction and criteria based load groups. b. Prepare contract plans for construction of the retaining walls. The plans will include the following information for all wall components: • Structural layout and vertical wall geometry. • Dimensions and configurations of structural components. • Design notes, general notes, and material notes. • Design details, including steel sheet pile, reinforcing, concrete, or other dependent on wall type c. For South 259'h Wall only (see Exhibit B1), prepare contract plans for construction of the flood gates at driveway breaks in the retaining wall. The plans will include the following information for all wall components: • Structural layout and vertical wall geometry. • Dimensions and configurations of structural components. • Design notes, general notes, and material notes. Assumptions: 2. Final design of the structures on the Project will be in accordance with the established design criteria. I The structures for the Project will be based on the alternative selected in cooperation with the City. 4. A registered Structural Engineer in the State of Washington will seal the final 100% contract plans. 5. See the Level of Effort Estimate for the assumed number of plan sheets that will be required for the wall. Deliverables: Structural Plan sheets Final Structural Calculations Task 5. — Special Provisions for Wall: The Consultant will compile the specified general special provisions, amendments, and Special Provisions from the above sections according to the WSDOT/APWA Standard Specifications, English. The Consultant will prepare a Bid Schedule for the wall. Special Provisions and bid schedule will be included in the 60 percent and 100 percent submittals. The Consultant will review the Contract Provisions for the Project prepared by the City and provide comments and revisions as necessary. Assumptions: 6. The Consultant will prepare only special provisions and bid schedule for the wall. The City will be responsible for assembling the entire specification package. 7. Electronic copy of submittals will be in Microsoft Word or Excel Deliverables: Special Provisions at 60 percent submittal Special Provisions at 100 percent submittal Horseshoe Bend Sht Pile Walls Scope including A B 20120130 v0(2).docx Page 7 of 9 ',. City of Kent A_COM Scope of Work-Exhibit A Bid Items Reviewed and marked up copy of Contract Provisions prepared by the City Bid schedule Task 6. — Compile Quantities and Prepare Opinion of Probable Cost for the Wall: The Consultant will compile the quantities and opinion of probable cost using AECOM and WSDOT Unit Bid Prices. The Engineer's opinion of construction cost for the Project will be submitted to the City at the 60, and 100 percent level-of-completion of the plans and specifications. Assumptions: 8. The construction contract will be based on a unit price bid item amount for the main work elements. 9. Any opinions of cost provided by the Consultant will be on a basis of experience and judgment, but since it has no control over market conditions or bidding procedures, the Consultant cannot warrant that bids or ultimate construction costs will not vary from these cost estimates. Deliverables: Opinion of Probable Cost, 60 percent Submittal (1 hard copy) Opinion of Probable Cost, 100 percent Submittal (1 electronic and 1 hard copy) Task 7. Compile Project Deliverables for Wall: The Consultant will assemble the work from each of the foregoing final design work tasks into 60 and 100 percent design submittals to the City. Interim submittal drawings will be 11" x 17". The final drawings will be plotted full size (22" x 34") and stamped by a registered Structural Engineer. Assumptions: The PS&E submittals in Phase 2 will be the following. Deliverables: 60 Percent PS&E Submittal • Plans • Special Provisions • Opinion of probable cost 100 Percent PS&E Submittal • Plans • Special Provisions • Bid Schedule • Opinion of probable cost • Incorporate City and other agency comments and/or responses • Electronic copy of specified special provisions in Microsoft Word • Electronic copy of engineering plans in AutoCAD format Printer Ready PS&E Submittal for Advertising (Ad Set) • Sealed Plans • Sealed Special Provisions • Bid Schedule I • Opinion of probable cost • Incorporate City and other agency comments and/or responses Task 8. — Respond to Review Comments: Following the City's review of the 60 and 90 percent PS&E Submittal packages, the Consultant will coordinate with City representatives to discuss the City's Horseshoe Send Sht Pile Walls Scope including A 8 20120130 v0(2).docx Page 8 of City of Kent AXOM Scope of Work-Exhibit A comments. The plans and special provisions will be modified by the Consultant to address these review comments. A written response will be provided to the City for those comments not incorporated into the design. Assumptions: 1. The City will provide a set of review comments for response by the Consultant. Deliverables: Prepare written responses to City Comments to the 60 percent Review Submittal Task 9. —Assistance during Pre-Bid & Bid Periods: Once the'Ad Set of PS&E Submittal to the City has been completed for the construction contract, the Consultant will remain 'on-call' until the contract has been awarded to the successful bidder. The types of assistance that the Consultant will provide to the City during the pre-bid and bid periods of the Project may include: • Assisting City in responding to engineering questions from Contractors. • Interpreting and clarifying the bid documents. • Assisting the City in preparing contract addendum. • Assisting the City's project manager in evaluating the bids. i l i Horseshoe Bend Sht Pile Walls Scope including A 8 20120130 v0(2).docx Page 9 of 9 City of Kent //�k.�.� ICI! 259th Street Walls and Gates AZCOM 259th Street Walls and Gates Exhibit 137 No.of Hoursl Structural Prol Eng/ CADD/ pro! Structural Wall length Sheets Sheet Manager Eng Des Tech Admin QNQC Total Hours Total Cost(DL) $76,31 $69.71 $50.48 $260a Wake $59.00 140 Task 1= ,Afg6 trlana9e' entanTt'oordrandom "•r*:..T`" Project Management 4 6 10 $533.24 I 1 Meetings - 1 2 4 6 $354.54 Coordination aith City and Other Consultants 2 4 6 $354.54 meeting tluxlion\NlM1 bevel time(M1rs) a Total Management and Coordination 8 0 6 0 6 1 0 22 1 $1,242.32 Tasks alteVlslt --4 t' Site VISR w0h travel time 444 B $480.76 Total Site Vlslt 0 4 4 0 0 D B $48076 Tasks. 3"T PS&E for Walls and I , Design CntenaB Wall Type Review 1 4 4 _ 0 $55707 Wall-Analysts Design,and Plan Sheets-Me sheets _ _ 4 24 20 48 $2,010.38 Gates-Analysts,Design,and Plan Sheets .sheets 4 24 20 48 $2,010.36 ouse ells&Gates) 4 .84 01`GDIscIpIpline OQA/QCh CiNI&WGeotechnical _ 1 2 4 7 $41765 To[sI PS&E for Walls and Gates 2 18 56 40 0 D 112 $5,274 tl Tasks t4 j Bp9clal PioNslOns ,— .U.aE-,-, Draft Specifications(60%)(Walls and Gates) 2 iD 12 $644.22 Final Specifications(100%)(Walls and Gates) 1 2 4 ] $41Z65 Total Special Provisions 1 1 4 14 0 0 D 19 - Task6� 'i ,:G11aMitiesandO In on 4f CosN .. Item List 2 6 6 $442.30 Preliminary Estimate(60%) 1 2 4 7 -$417.65 ! Final Cast Estimate(100%) 1 1 2 �I, ! 4 _ $245,98 Total Quenlllles and Opinion of Cost 2 5 12 0 0 0 19 $1,106.83 Tasks7649„Deliverable.,Res and CO Cemmants,and Bid Renotl Ass7stance y. Compile deliverables 2 2 '' 4 $152.96 ___ _ Respond to Revew Comments 1 4 _.__6 $27163 ! Assistance during Bid Period 1 2 4 7 $417,65 ! Total Deliverables,Respond to Comments,and Bitl Period Assistance ! 1 3 10 2 1 0 0 16 $842.24 Total Structural 14 34 104 42 6 0 19a $10,000.40 OUTSIDE REIMBURSABLES AECOM Direct Salary $1D,008.40 Per Dlem $0.00 AECOM Overhead @ 163.14% $15,327.70 Lodging $0.00 AECOM Subtotal $25,336.10 Mlleagelpers.Vehicle($055/mile) $125.00 Meals $0,00 AECOM Fee N% $3,002.62 Supplies,Photos $0.00 Outside Reimbursables $220.00 Reproduction $50,00 Subconsullents $0.00 Postagef0elivery $20.00 TOTAL• $29,666.82 Other $25.00 Management Reserve Fund= 0% $0.00 Markup for Reimb. 0 0% 50,00 GRANDTOTAL= $291666.62 Total: $220.00 Notes. 1) his estimate Is based on an T wall,unity penetrations,and consultant designed gates '.. 2) this estimate...ames that the City will provide a DTM model that is complete for honz&ved.layout,quantities,and cast estimtlng 3) drainage by others Fila: P\Publicl Public Works Commalee@012W2-1312\Item c-AECOM 259N Wall Gates Estlmata.Isx !� Sheol:259Ih&Gatos Page 1 of 1 City of Kent 259th Street Wall near Pond com 259th Street Wall near Pond Exhibit B2 No of Hound Structural Pro ErgI CADDI Prol Structural Well length Shoots Sheet Manager Eng Des Tech Admin OA/QC Total Hours TotalCost(DL) $7631 $69,71 SBOAS $26.00 $38,00 $5900 No,of I Tasks Mgs Management and Coordination Project Management 3 6 9 $456.93 1 Meetings 4 4 a —uw.lo Coordination with City and Other Consultants 2 2 4 $253.58 sneirn,duration wt travel lInne(h,$) 4 1 Total Management and Coordination 9 0 6 0 6 0 1 21 M$1�21111 I 'Te i Task 2 ,sit Site Vsit with travel time _ 4 4 Total Site Visit 0 4-7-4 C 0 0 a $ Tasks Z&4 PS&EforWalls Design Criteria&Wall Type Review 2 4 i, 7 $417.65 Well-Analysis,Design,and Plan Sheets-one sheet 4 20 16 40 $1,704.44 Discipline Ci4JQC-in house 4 $278.84 IntarDiserpine QAJQG-Civil&Geoteal-rical 1 4 4 9 $557 07 Total PS&E for Walls 2 14 28 16 0 0 fib $2,958.00 P�T, Tasks !at Pr¢vtslpns TIT fleabane(80% 1 3 4 S221.15 FinelS ecircations(100%) 1 1 2 4 $246.98 Total Special )Visora 1 2 1 5 0 1 0 0 6 S468 13 TEi AT 7 Tasks Quantities and Opinion of Cost U.,List 1 2 3 $170.67 Preliminary Estimate(60%) 11--U- 6 $347.94 Final Cost Estimate(100%) 1 2 3 S170T67 Total quantities and Opinion of Cast S68928 Bid Period Auedeben..'k vA?3uiRespond to Comments,and It v, Tasks 1 Compile dolvembled 2 2 4 515298 Respond t.Review Comments 1 3 - 4 5221.15 Assistance di Bid Period 1 2 4 7 $41765 Total Deliverables,Respond to Comments,and Bid Period Assistance 1 3 9 2 0 0 15 879176 --- -------- - Tells—�st—wwl 14 26 60 18 6 0 0 120- OUTSIDE REIMEURSABLES AECOM Direct Salary $6.6C5 50 Per Diem $0.00 AECOM Overhead @ 163.14% $10,776.38 Lodging S0.00 AECOM Subtotal $17,38198 Miliesplace.Vehicle($0,551mile) $125.00 Meals $0.00 AECOM Fee 30% $1 981S8 Supplies,Photos $0,00 Outside Rainnoursables $220,00 Rojeu&idiou $50.00 Subconsultans $000 Postage/Delivery $20.00 TOTAL $19,583.66 Other $25.00 Management Reserve Fund 0% $0.00 Markup for Reirrib. D 0% $0,00 Gltssl,IDTOTAL= $19'souts Total: $220.00 Notes: 1) his eeftes is based an an"If wall,with potential ultity penetrations 2) this estimate assumes that the City will provide a D'I'M model that is complete for haste&vert.layout quantities,and cost esurnting 3) drainage by others File: P Tublic%Publis,Wags CommitleeW D02 13 1 Ztem d-AECOM 259N Wall eassr pond Etflase Mmadi Sheet 2591h Near Pond Page 1 of 1 i Horseshoe Bend Retaining Walls I Cost Summary(See attached Budgets heets for each wall) Wall Tota I Cost 259th St. Walls and Gates $ 29,558.62 259th Street Wall near Pond $ 19,583.66 Grand Total $ 49,142.28 it i I KENT Agenda Item: Consent Calendar — 70 TO: City Council DATE: February 21, 2012 SUBJECT: Proposed Local Improvement District, SE 256th Street — Authorize MOTION: Authorize the Mayor to direct staff to proceed with the formation of Local Improvement District #364. SUMMARY: The City has successfully obtained a $2 million dollar grant from the Washington State Transportation Improvement Board (TIB) for the repair, widening and upgrading of SE 256th Street between Kent-Kangley Road and 116th Ave. SE. The City has completed widening projects on SE 256th Street from 116th Ave SE to 132nd Ave SE. This project will complete the missing gap between 116th and Kent- Kangley Road, and will include new curb and gutter, sidewalks, storm drainage and detention, bike lanes, street lighting, undergrounding of aerial electrical, telephone and cable TV facilities and landscaping. In order to more evenly distribute funding of the project, Engineering would like to pursue the formation of a Local Improvement District (L.I.D.) with the benefiting properties being assessed a share of the project cost. There are 307 properties included as shown on the L.I.D. boundary map. Many of these are condo and single family properties. In addition, there are a few commercial, office and apartment properties. We are now ready to move forward with the L.I.D. formation. EXHIBITS: Attachment A RECOMMENDED BY: Public Works Committee BUDGET IMPACTS: The total project cost is $7,000,000 with funding from the following sources. T.I.B. Grant $2,000,000.00 L.I.D. $2,040,273.71 Mitigation Fees $58,000.00 Storm Drainage $1,259,726.29 Total Project $7,000,000.00 ATTACHMENT 'A' Background/History: The City has been very successful in obtaining a 2 million dollar grant for the repair, widening and upgrading of SE 256th Street. The project has been on our 6-year TIP for some time. The project will: • Provide needed east-west capacity to the existing traffic system along SE 256th Street. • Improve ingress and egress for the adjacent properties. • Provide a safer route for vehicles, pedestrians and bicycles. • Will add additional service life to the roadway pavement. • Will bring the roadway up to City standards. • Will provide visual improvements. Most of the proposed improvements are considered a special benefit to the local properties, therefore there is a potential for LID funding. Benefiting properties are those with direct frontage on SE 256th St, and those whose access is from SE 256th Street. See attached L.I.D. boundary map. The Engineering Division would like to pursue the formation of a Local Improvement District (L.I.D.) with the benefiting properties being assessed a share of the project cost. Local improvement districts have successfully been used to help fund most arterial improvement projects within the City. Recent successful LID projects include the 196th/200th Street Corridor, the S. 228th Street Corridor west leg, the S.272nd/277th Corridor, Washington Avenue and Meeker Street, 116th Ave. SE and East Valley Highway. In the past 22 years the City has formed 25 street L.I.D.s totaling approximately $80,000,000. Proposed Improvements: The overall project limits for SE 256th Street are Kent-Kangley Road to the west at the 'Y' intersection and 116th Ave. SE to the east. The roadway improvements include: • Widening to 3 lanes with a center turn lane. Right of way for the road widening will be acquired. • Installations of cement concrete sidewalks and driveways. • Bicycle lanes in both directions • New roadway pavement section • Curb and gutters • Planter Strips • Storm drainage system with detention and treatment • Purchase of property for detention pond • Existing utilities and other improvements such as fire hydrants, manholes, valve boxes, water meters, j-boxes, monument cases, mailboxes, fences and signs will be relocated or adjusted as necessary • Channelization • Traffic signs • Street trees CID364PWCre,olm o.,.o.dx • Street lighting • Erosion control • Retaining walls where necessary • Undergrounding of electrical facilities • Wheel chair ramps in the curb and sidewalk at the intersections • Traffic signal revisions as necessary at both ends of the project Need for the Improvements: SE 256th Street is an arterial that has an average traffic volume of 11,500 vehicles per day. This volume is expected to continue to increase in the future. SE 256th Street is a substandard two-lane roadway with no curbs, gutters or sidewalks and a limited street light system. During peak hours, the roadway cannot accommodate the traffic volumes due to the large number of vehicles blocking the roadway while waiting to turn left into driveways. The project is needed to increase the capacity and improve both vehicle and pedestrian safety of this roadway by adding two general purpose lanes, a new center left turn lane, bike lanes and sidewalks. These improvements are also needed to bring the roadway up to code to meet both functional and visual requirements and to complete the roadway widening between the existing already widened sections of roadway at each end of the project. Widening of the roadway to provide a center continuous left turn lane is required to provide increased safety and convenience for drivers making turns. In addition, through traffic will not suffer extra delay or congestion due to left turning traffic. Vehicles waiting to make left turns will be able to stand completely out of the through traffic lanes. Pedestrian improvements are also needed to provide increased pedestrian safety. The project will provide sidewalks separated from the road by curbing and a planter strip to provide a safe place to walk. Bike lanes are also included. Currently drainage, detention and water quality treatment are non-existent for much of this portion of SE 256th Street. Localized flooding and ponding of storm water can occur. A complete and adequate drainage system for the area is needed to provide for collection, detention, treatment and disposal of storm water. Because of this need, this project is included in the City's Six Year Transportation Improvement Program. A complete road improvement in accordance with City standards is needed. Proposed Funding: T.I.B. Grant $2,000,000.00 L.I.D. $2,040,273.71 Mitigation Fees $58,000.00 City funds $3,101,726.29 Total Project $7,200,000.00 There is no City owned property within the L.I.D. boundary. However, property (unknown location) may be purchased for the storm water detention and treatment facilities. The City will pay the assessment for this property. CID364PWCre,olm o.,.o.dx Method of Assessment: To determine the assessment amounts and the distribution, we consulted a real estate appraiser. The information received from the appraiser regarding potential benefits to the properties is being used to determine the assessments. The assessments are based on property value. Also, the parcels with direct frontage on the road are assessed at a higher rate. Support for The L.I.D.: In the past, developers signed 8 L.I.D. no protest covenants covering 27 parcels. Three have expired. These parcels are shown on the table below and are indicated on the attached map. The proposed project will meet the requirements of the outstanding covenants. L.I.D. Covenants Recording # of Assmt. # Original Development Parcels Expires Tax Lot No. 9412291765 East Hill Self Storage 1 expired 202205 9185 3 202205 9273- 8411080050 Sunrise Point Short Plat 2 none 9274 88, 89,92 8603040124 Discovery Word Day Care &Preschool 1 none 880100 0010 181 637900 0010- 0140 637920 0030- 8102130291 Olympic Estates Plat 18 none 0060 199-216 Allen Homes Inc. residential bldg 9402250022 permit 1 1 expired 1 216140 0010 1300 8502050035 Teter Professional Building 1 none 292205 9087 301 8506140126 Kent Kangley Center 1 none 292205 9069 305 9107100569 Stratford Arms Apts. Phase II 1 expired 202205 9281 132 Notes: 1. Expiration date is 10 years plus 6 years after signing 2. Older covenants do not have an expiration date. 3. Property #87 paid a mitigation fee of $58,000 at the time of development in lieu of signing a covenant. CID364PWCre,olm o.,.o.dx KENT Agenda Item: Consent Calendar - 7P TO: City Council DATE: February 21, 2012 SUBJECT: Washington Recreation and Conservation Office Grant, Downey Farmstead Restoration Project - Accept MOTION: Authorize the Mayor to accept the Washington State Recreation and Conservation Office (RCO) grant in the amount of $253,581, amend the budget and authorize expenditure of the funds in accordance with the grant terms, subject to final terms and conditions acceptable to the City Attorney and Public Works Director. SUMMARY: The Downey Farmstead Restoration Project involves four parcels totaling 21.81 acres located along the left bank of the Green River from River Mile 21.7 to 22.2 (across the river from the Riverbend Driving Range, near SR 516). This restoration project will include realignment and setback of Frager Road from the Green River in order to reconnect the floodplain and create off-channel rearing and refuge habitat, primarily for juvenile Chinook salmon. A secondary goal of the project is to create additional flood storage to help alleviate flood damage to nearby urban and agricultural areas. Funds from this grant will be used to cover the cost of final design plans, permitting, specs and construction cost estimate. EXHIBITS: PSAR Project Agreement #11-1219P RECOMMENDED BY: Public Works Committee BUDGET IMPACTS: The City has already received a grant for $46,419 from the King Conservation District for matching funds for this project. This grant from RCO in the amount of $253,581 will bring the total to $300,000 to fund the project. No city funds are required. it _ WASHINGTON STATE Recreation and Conservation Office PSAR Project Agreement Salmon Funding Accounts Project Sponsor: City of Kent Project Number:11-1219P Project Title: Downey Farmstead Final Design Approval Date:12/9/2011 A. PARTIES OF THE AGREEMENT ', This project grant Agreement(Agreement)is entered into between the State of Washington by and through the ', Salmon Recovery Funding Board(SRFB)and the Recreation and Conservation Office, P.O.Box 40917,Olympia, Washington 98504-0917 and City of Kent(sponsor),220 Fourth Ave S,Kent,WA 98032-5895 and shall be binding on the agents and all persons acting by or through the parties. B. PURPOSE OFAGREEMENT This Agreement sets out the terms and conditions by which a grant is made from the Salmon Funding Accounts of the State of Washington. The grant is administered by the Recreation and Conservation Office(RCO)to the sponsor for the project named above- C. DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT City of Kent will complete final design and permitting of the Downey Farmstead Restoration project to realign and '. setback Frager Road from the Green River in order to reconnect the floodplain and create off-channel rearing and refuge habitat,primarily forjuvenile Chinook salmon.A secondary goal of the project is to create additional flood storage to help alleviate flood damage to nearby urban and agricultural areas. The project site is located in King County along the left(south)bank of the Green River between river mile 21.5 and 22.3 on 21.8 acres of property owned by City of Kent and purchased with 2002 SRFB funding(02-1601).The '.. downstream edge of the site coincides with the confluence of Mullen Slough with the Green River. Afeasibility study and 30%design document for the Downey Farmstead was successfully completed with 2008 SRFB funding(08-1659). D. PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE The project reimbursement period shall begin on December 8,2011 and end on December 31,2013. No expenditure made before or after this period is eligible for reimbursement unless incorporated by written amendment into this Agreement or specifically provided for by RCFB andlor SRFB policy or WAC. Requests for time extensions are to be made at least 60 days before the Agreement end date. If the request is made after the Agreement end date,the time extension will be denied. i The sponsor has obligations beyond this period of performance as described in Section E. E. ON-GOING OBLIGATION The Project Sponsor's on-going obligation for the project shall be the same as the Period of Performance period identified in Section D. F. PROJECT FUNDING The total grant award provided by the funding board for this project shall not exceed$253,581.00. The funding board shall not pay any amount beyond that approved for grant funding of the project and within the funding board's percentage as identified below. The sponsor shall be responsible for all total project costs that exceed this amount. The contribution by the sponsor toward work on this project at a minimum shall be as indicated below: Percentage DollarAmount SRFB-Puget Sound Acq.B Restoration 84.53% $253,581.00 Project Sponsor 15.47% $46,419.00 Total Project Cost 100.00% $300,000.00 PSAR Project Agreement-RCO#11-1219P - Salmon Funding Accounts Chapter 77.85 RCW,Chapter 420 WAG Page 1 of 16 PROJAGR.RPT '. I G. RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS All rights and obligations of the parties to this Agreement are subject to this Agreement and its attachments,as now existing or hereafter amended,including the sponsor's application,eligible scope activities,project milestones,and j the Standard Terms and Conditions of the project Agreement,all of which are incorporated herein. i Except as provided herein,no amendmentldeletions of any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement will be effective unless provided in writing. All such amendment/deletions must be signed by both parties except the ROO director may unilaterally make amendments to extend the period of performance. Period of performance extensions need only be signed by RCO's director or designee. '.. H. COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE STATUTES,RULES,AND RCFBSRFB POLICIES This agreement is governed by,and the sponsor shall comply with,all applicable state and federal laws and regulations, including Chapter 77.85 ROW,Chapter 420 WAC,and published agency policies,which are incorporated herein by this reference as if fully set forth. I. SPECIAL CONDITIONS a. Cultural Resources Consultation: This project is subject to the National Historic Preservation Act, Section 106, and therefore appears to be exempt from Governor's Executive Order 05-05 Archaeological and Cultural Resources(EO 05-05)as described in Section 9 of this project agreement. In order for this project to be exempt from EO 05-05,the Section 106 Area of Potential Effect(APE)must include all ground-disturbing activities subject to this project agreement, including the restoration staging area. The sponsor is encouraged to work with the federal permitting agency to align the Section 106 APE with the scope of work subject to this project agreement. If the APE does not include all ground-disturbing activities subject to this project agreement,promptly notify the RCO grant manager, as this will require ROO to initiate cultural resources consultation following EO 05-05 for those activities not included in the federal APE. Completion of this consultation and a Notice to Proceed from ROO will be required before these ground-disturbing activities can begin. b. Design Deliverables:The project will meet the standards for Design and Restoration Project Deliverables described in Manual 18(2012)Appendix D"Final Design Deliverables." J. FEDERAL FUND INFORMATION (none) K. PROJECT GRANT AGREEMENT REPRESENTATIVE All written communications and notices under this Agreement will be addressed and sent to at least the mail address or the email address listed below if not both: Project Contact SRF13 Name: Alex Murillo Recreation and Conservation Office Title: ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING SUPE Natural Resources Building Address: 220 Fourth Ave S PO Box 40917 Kent,WA 98032 Olympia,Washington 98504-0917 Email: amurillo@cLoent.wa.us These addresses shall be effective until receipt by one party from the other of a written notice of any change.! L. ENTIREAGREEMENT This Agreement,with all amendments and attachments,constitutes the entire Agreement of the parties. No other understandings,oral or otherwise,regarding this Agreement shall exist or bind any of the parties. M. EFFECTIVE DATE This Agreement,for project 11-1219P,shall be subject to the written approval of the ROO's authorized representative and shall not be effective and binding until executed by both the Sponsor and the RCO. Reimbursements for eligible and allowable costs incurred within the period of performance identified in Section D above are allowed only when this Agreement is fully executed and an original is received by ROO. PSAR Project Agreement-ROO#11-1219P Salmon Funding Accounts Chapter 77.85 ROW,Chapter 420 WAC Page 2 of 1e PROJAGRAPT The sponsor/s has mad,fully understands,and agrees to be bound by all terms and conditions as set forth in this Agreement,The signatory listed below represent and warrant their authority to bind the parties to this Agreement. City of Kent j i By: Date: Name: (printed) Title: State of Washington ill On behalf of the Salmon Recovery Funding Board(SRFB) By: Date: Kaleen Cottingham Director, Recreation and Conservation Office Pre-approved as to form: By: /s/ Date: June 27, 2011 '.. Assistant Attorney General I j i PSAR Project Agreement-RCO k11-1219P Salmon Funding Accounts ',.. Chapter 77.85 RCW,Chapter 420 WAC - Page 3 of 16 PROJAGR,RPT j Standard Terms and Conditions of the Project Agreement Table of Contents Page SECTION 1. CITATIONS,HEADINGS AND DEFINITIONS............................................................ 6 SECTION 2. PERFORMANCE BY THE SPONSOR..................................................................... 7 '.. SECTION3. ASSIGNMENT................................................................................ ................... 7 SECTION 4. RESPONSIBILITY FOR PROJECT......................................................................... 7 I SECTION 5. INDEMNIFICATION............................................................................................. 7 SECTION 6. INDEPENDENT CAPAPCITY OF THE SPONSOR..................................................... 7 I SECTION 7. CONFLICT OF INTEREST.................................................................................... 7 SECTION 8. ACKNOWLEDGMENT AND SIGNS........................................................................ 7 SECTION 9. COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE LAW............................................................... 8 SECTION 10. HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES............ ........ ...... ....................... 9 SECTION11. RECORDS............................---................_..................................................... 9 SECTION 12. TREATMENT OF ASSETS.................................................................................... 9 i SECTION 13. RIGHT OF INSPECTION............................................................................I.......... 9 SECTION 14. STEWARDSHIP AND MONITORING...................................................................... 9 SECTION 15. DEBARMENT CERTIFICATION............................................................................. 10 SECTION 16. PROJECT FUNDING........................................................................................... 10 SECTION 17. PROJECT REIMBURSEMENTS............................................................................ 10 SECTION 18. ADVANCE PAYMENTS....................................................................................... 10 i SECTION 19. RECOVERY OF PAYMENTS....................... ...................................................... 11 SECTION 20. CONVENANT AGAINST CONTINGENT FEES......................................................... 11 SECTION 21. PROVISIONS APPLYING TO DEVELOPMENT,RENOVATION AND '.. RESTORATION PROJECTS.................................................................................. 11 SECTION 22, PROVISIONS APPLYING TO ACQUISITION PROJECTS.......................................... 11 SECTION 23. RESTRICTION ON CONVERSION OF REAL PROPERTY ANDIOR FACILITIES TO OTHER USES............................................I.................... 12 SECTION 24. CONSTRUCTION,OPERATION,USE AND MAINTENANCE OF ASSISTED PROJECTS..................................................................I............... 12 SECTION 25. INCOME AND INCOME USE................................................................................ 13 SECTION 26. PREFERENCES FOR RESIDENTS....................................................................... 13 PSAR Project Agreement-RC0 811-1219P Salmon Funding Accounts Chapter 77.85 RCW,Chapter 420 WAC Page 4 of 16 PROJAGR.RPT SECTION 27. PROVISIONS RELATED TO CORPORATE(INCLUDING NONPROFIT) SPONSORS.................................................................................I.................... 13 SECTION 28. LIBAILITY INSURANCE REQUIRMENTS FOR FIREARMS AND ARCHERY RANGE SPONSORS................................................................... 13 SECTION 29. REQUIRMENTS OF THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE....................... 14 SECTION 30. FARMLAND PRESERVATION ACCOUNT............................................................. 14 i SECTION 31. ORDER OF PRECEDENCE................................................................................. 14 SECTION 32. AMENDMENTS................................................................................................. 14 SECTION 33. LIMITATION OF AUTHORITY.............................................................................. 14 SECTION 34. WAIVER OF DEFAULT....................................................................................... 14 SECTION 35. APPLICATION REPRESENTATIONS-MISREPRESENTATIONSII OR INACCURACY OR BREACH.......................................................................... 14 SECTION 36. SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE................................................................................ 15 SECTION 37. TERMINATION..................................................................................I.............. 15 SECTION 38, DISPUTE HEARING.......................................................................................... 15 SECTION 39. ATTORNEYS'FEES.......................................................................................... 15 SECTION 40. GOVERNING LAWNENUE................................................................................. 16 SECTION 41. SEVERABILITY................................................................................................ 16 I PSAR Project Agreement-RCO#11-1219P Salmon Funding Accounts Chapter 77.85 RCW,Chapter 420 WAC Page 5 of 16 '.. PROJAGR.RPT WASMNGTON STATE Recreation and Conservation Office Standard Terms and Conditions of the Project Agreement Project Sponsor: City of Kent Project Number:11-1219P Project Title: Downey Farmstead Final Design Approval Date:12/9/2011 SECTIONS. CITATIONS,HEADINGS AND DEFINITIONSII' A. Any citations referencing specific documents refer to the current version at the date of project Agreement and/or any revisions in the future. B. Headings used in this Agreement are for reference purposes only and shall not be considered a substantive part of this Agreement. C. Definitions.As used throughout this Agreement,the following terms shall have the meaning set forth below: acquisition-The purchase of fee or less than fee interests in real property. These interests include,but are not limited to, options,right of first refusal,conservation easements,access/rail easements,covenants,water rights, leases,and mineral rights. Agreement-The accord accepted by all parties to the present transaction;this Agreement,any supplemental Agreements,any amendments to this Agreement and any intergovernmental Agreements. applicant-Any agency or organization that meets the qualifying standards,including deadlines,for submission of an application soliciting a grant of funds from the funding Board application-The documents and other materials that an applicant submits to the RCO to support the applicant's request for grant funds;this includes materials required for the"Application"in the RCO's automated project information system, and other documents as noted on the application checklist including but not limited to legal opinions,evaluation presentations and scripts. ', asset-Equipment purchased by the sponsor or acquired or transferred to the sponsor for the purpose of this Agreement.This definition is restricted to non-fixed assets,including but not limited to vehicles,computers or machinery. cognizant or oversight agency-Federal agency responsible for ensuring compliance with federal audit requirements. contractor-Shall mean one not in the employment of the sponsor who is performing all or part of the eligible activities for this project under a separate Agreement with the sponsor.The term"contractor'and"contractors"means contractor(s)in any tier. secondary sponsor-one of two or more eligible organizations that sponsors a grant-funded project.Of these two sponsors, only one-the primary sponsor-may be the fiscal agent. development-The construction of or work resulting in new elements,intruding but not limited to structures,facilities,and/or materials to enhance outdoor recreation,salmon recovery or habitat conservation resources. director-The chief executive officer of the Recreation and Conservation Office or that person's designee. elements,items and worktypes-Components of the funded project as provided in the project description. funding board-The board that authorized the funds in this Agreement,either the Recreation and Conservation Funding Board (RCFB)created under chapter 79A.25.110 RCW,or the Salmon Recovery Funding Board(SRFB).created under chapter 77.85.110 RCW. grantee-The organizational entity or individual to which a grant(or cooperative agreement)is awarded and signatory to the Agreement which is responsible and accountable both for the use of the funds provided and for the performance of the grant-supported project or activities. landowner agreement-A landowner agreement is required between a SRFB project sponsor and landowner for projects located on land not owned,or otherwise controlled, by the sponsor. lower tier participant-refers to any sponsor receiving a federal grant through RCO. Lower tier participants also refer to any grantee,subgrantee,or contractor of any grantee or subgrantee from the original sponsor funded by RCO. milestone-An important event with a defined deadline for an activity related to implementation of a funded project, period of performance-The time period specified in the Agreement,under Section D, period of performance. project-The undertaking that is the subject of this Agreement and that is,or may be,funded in whole or in part with funds administered by RCO on behalf of the funding board. RCO-Recreation and Conservation Office-The state office that provides administrative support to the Recreation and Conservation Funding Board and Salmon Recovery Funding Board.RCO includes the director and staff,created by Chapters 79A.25.110 and 79A.25.150 RCW and charged with administering this Agreement by Chapters 77.85.110 and 79A.25.240 RCW. reimbursement-Payment of eligible and allowable costs that have already been paid by the sponsor per the terms of the Agreement. renovation- The activities intended to improve an existing site or structure in order to increase its service rife or functions.This does not include maintenance activities. restoration-Bringing a site back to its original function as part of a natural ecosystem or improving the ecological functionality of a site. sponsor-The eligible applicant who has been awarded a grant of funds and is bound by this executed Agreement;includes its officers,employees,agents and successors. subgrantee-The tern subgrantee means the government or other legal entity to which a subgrant is awarded and which is accountable to the grantee for the use of the funds provided. PSAR Project Agreement-RCO#11-1219P Salmon Funding Accounts Chapter 77.85 RCW,Chapter 420 WAC Page a of 16 PROJAGR.RPT SECTION 2. PERFORMANCE BY THE SPONSOR The sponsor,and secondary sponsor where applicable,shall undertake the project as described in this Agreement,post evaluation summary,the sponsor's application,and in accordance with the sponsor's proposed goals and objectives described in the application or documents submitted with the application,all as finally approved by the funding board.All submitted documents are incorporated by this reference as if fully set forth herein.The Order of Precedence is covered in Section 31. Timely completion of the project and submission of required documents,including progress and final reports,is important.Failure to meet critical milestones or complete the project,as set out in this Agreement,is a material breach of the Agreement. '.. SECTION 3. ASSIGNMENT Neither this Agreement,nor any claim arising under this Agreement,shall be transferred or assigned by the sponsor without prior written consent of the Recreation and Conservation Office. SECTION 4. RESPONSIBILITY FOR PROJECT While the funding board undertakes to assist the sponsor with the project by providing a grant pursuant to this Agreement,the project itself remains the sole responsibility of the sponsor.The funding board undertakes no responsibilities to the sponsor,a secondary sponsor,or to any third party,other than as is expressly set out in this Agreement.The responsibility for the implementation of the project is solely that of the sponsor,as is the responsibility for any claim or suit of any nature by any third party related in anyway to the project. When a project is sponsored by more than one entity,any and all sponsors.are equally responsible for the project and all post-completion stewardship responsibilities. SECTION S. INDEMNIFICATION To the fullest extent permitted by the law,the sponsor expressly agrees to and shall indemnify,defend and hold harmless the State and its agencies,officials,agents and employees from and against all claims,actions,costs,damages,or expenses of any nature arising out of or incident to the sponsor's or any contractor's performance or failure to perform the Agreement.Sponsor's obligation to indemnify,defend and hold harmless also includes any claim by sponsor's agents,employees,representatives or any contractor or its '.. employees.Sponsor's obligation to defend includes payment of any costs or attorneys'fees. Sponsor's obligation shall not include such claims that may be caused by the sole negligence of RCO,its officials,agents,and employees. If the claims or damages are caused by or result from the concurrent negligence of(a)RCO,its agents or employees and (b)the sponsor, its contractors,agents,or employees,this indemnity provision shall be valid and enforceable only to the extent of the negligence of the sponsor or its contractors,agents,or employees.The sponsor expressly agrees to waive his/her immunity under Title 51 RCW(as to the State,and its agencies but not as to any employee,worker or third party)to the extent required to indemnify, defend,and hold harmless the State and its agencies,officials,agents or employees. SECTIONS. INDEPENDENT CAPACITY OF THE SPONSOR The sponsor and its employees or agents performing under this Agreement are not officers,employees or agents of the funding board or RCO.The sponsor will not hold itself out as nor claim to be an officer,employee or agent of RCO,a funding board or of the state of Washington,nor will the sponsor make any claim of right,privilege or benefit which would accrue to an employee under Chapters li 41.06 or 28B RCW. The sponsor is responsible for withholding and/or paying employment taxes,insurance,or deductions of any kind required by federal, state,and/or local laws. SECTION 7. CONFLICT OF INTEREST Notwithstanding any determination by the Executive Ethics Board or other tribunal,RCO may,in its sole discretion,by written notice to the sponsor terminate this Agreement if it is found after due notice and examination by RCO that there is a violation of the Ethics in Public Service Act,Chapter 42.52 RCW;or any similar statute involving the sponsor in the procurement of,or performance under,this ',.. Agreement In the event this Agreement is terminated as provided above,RCO shall be entitled to pursue the same remedies against the sponsor as it could pursue in the event of a breach of the Agreement by the sponsor.The rights and remedies of RCO provided for in this clause shall not be exclusive and are in addition to any other rights and remedies provided by law. SECTIONS. ACKNOWLEDGMENT AND SIGNS A. Publications.The sponsor shall include language which acknowledges the funding contribution of the applicable grant program to '.. this project in any release or other publication developed or modified for,or referring to,the project during the project period and in the future. B. Signs.The sponsor also shall post signs or other appropriate media during the project period and in the future at project entrances and other locations on the project which acknowledge the applicable grant program's funding contribution,unless exempted in funding board policy or waived by the director. C. Ceremonies.The sponsor shall notify RCO no later than two weeks before a dedication ceremony for this project.The sponsor shall verbally acknowledge the applicable grant program's funding contribution at all dedication ceremonies. PSAR Project Agreement-RCO#11-121 9P Salmon Funding Accounts Chapter 77.85 RCW,Chapter 420 WAC - Page 7 of 16 '.. PROJAGR.RPT 1 D. Federally Funded Projects.When issuing statements,press releases, requests for proposals,bid solicitations,and other documents describing a project funded in whole or in part with federal money provided for in this grant,sponsors shall clearly state: 1. The percentage of the total costs of the project that is financed with federal money; 2. The dollar amount of federal funds for the project;and 3. The percentage and dollar amount of the total costs of the project that is financed by nongovernmental sources. SECTION 9. COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE LAW The sponsor will implement the Agreement in accordance with applicable federal,state,and local laws,regulations and RCO and funding board policies regardless of whether the sponsor is a public or non-public organization. The sponsor shall comply with,and RCO is not responsible for determining compliance with,any and all applicable federal,state,and local laws,regulations,and/or policies,including,but not limited to:State Environmental Policy Act;Industrial Insurance Coverage; Architectural Barriers Act;permits(shoreline,Hydraulics Project Approval,demolition); land use regulations(critical areas ordinances, Growth Management Act);federal and state safety and health regulations(Occupational Safety and Health AdministrationfWashington Industrial Safety and Health Act);and Buy American Act. Endangered Species For habitat restoration projects funded in part or whole with federal funds administered by the SRFB the sponsor shall not commence with clearing of riparian trees or in-water work unless either the sponsor has complied with 50 CFR 223.203(b)(8),limit 8 or until an Endangered Species Act consultation is finalized in writing by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.Violation of this requirement maybe grounds for terminating this project Agreement. This section shall not be the basis for any enforcement responsibility by RCO. Nondiscrimination Laws The sponsor shall comply with all applicable federal, state,and local nondiscrimination laws and/or policies,including but not limited to:the Amedcans with Disabilities Act;Civil Rights Act;and the Age Discrimination Act. In the event of the sponsor's noncompliance or refusal to comply with any nondiscrimination law or policy,the Agreement may be rescinded,cancelled,or terminated in whole or in part,and the sponsor may be declared ineligible for further grant awards from the funding board.The sponsor is responsible for any and all costs or liability arising from the sponsor's failure to so comply with applicable law. Wages and Job Safety The sponsor agrees to comply with all applicable laws,regulations,and policies of the United States and the State of Washington which affect wages and job safety.The sponsor agrees to pay the prevailing wage rate to all workers,laborers,or mechanics employed in the performance of any part of this contract if state law applies to the lands in question and the prevailing wage law applies to the work being performed. The Washington State Department of Labor and Industries should be consulted to determine whether prevailing wage laws apply. Further the sponsor agrees to comply with the provisions of the Davis-Bacon Act as required, and any other applicable federal laws. Archaeological and Cultural Resources The sponsor must comply with Executive Order 05-05 or the National Historic Preservation Act before initiating ground disturbing '.. activity. The funding board requires documented compliance with Executive Order 05-05 or Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act,whichever is applicable to the project. If a federal agency declines to consult,the sponsor shall comply with the requirements of Executive Order05-05. In the event that archaeological or historic materials are discovered during project activities, work in the location of discovery and immediate vicinity must stop instantly,the area must be secured,and notification must be provided to the following:wricemed Tribes'cultural staff and cultural committees,RCO,and the State Department ol'Amhaeology and Historic Preservation. If human remains are discovered during project activity,work in the location of discovery and immediate vicinity must stop instantly,the area must be secured,and notification provided to the concerned Tribe's cultural staff and cultural committee,RCO,State Department of Archaeology,the coroner and local law enforcement in the most expeditious manner possible according to RCW 68.50 Restrictions on Grant Use No part of any funds provided under this grant shall be used,other than for normal and recognized executive-legislative relationships, for publicity or propaganda purposes,or for the preparation,distribution,or use of any kit,pamphlet,booklet,publication,radio, television,or video presentation designed to support or defeat legislation pending before the U.S.Congress or any state legislature. No part of any funds provided under this grant shall be used to pay the salary or expenses of any sponsor,or agent acting for such sponsor,related to any activity designed to influence legislation or appropriations pending before the U.S.Congress or any state j legislature. PSAR Project Agreement-RCO#11-1219P Salmon Funding Accounts Chapter 77.85 RCW,Chapter420 WAC Page e of 16 PROJAGR.RPT i SECTION 10. HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES A. Certification.The sponsor shall inspect,investigate,and conduct an environmental audit of the proposed acquisition site for the presence of hazardous substances,as defined in Chapter 70.105D.020(11)RCW,and certify: 1. No hazardous substances were found on the site,or 2. Any hazardous substances found have been treated and/or disposed of in compliance with applicable state and federal laws,and the site deemed"clean." B. Responsibility.Nothing in this provision alters the sponsor's duties and liabilities regarding hazardous substances as set forth in Chapter 70.105D RCW. C. Hold Harmless.The sponsor will defend,protect and hold harmless ROO and any and all of its employees and/or agents,from and against any and all liability,cost(including but not limited to all costs of defense and attorneys'fees)and any and all loss of any nature from any and all claims or suits resulting from the presence of,or the release or threatened release of, hazardous substances on the property the sponsor is acquiring. SECTION 11. RECORDS A. Maintenance.The sponsor shall maintain books,records,documents,data and other evidence relating to this Agreement and performance of the services described herein,including but not limited to accounting procedures and practices which sufficiently '.. and properly reflect all direct and indirect costs of any nature expended in the performance of this Agreement.Sponsor shall retain such records for a period of six years from the date RCO deems the project complete,as defined in Section 17(C)below. If any litigation,claim or audit is started before the expiration of the six(6)year period,the records shall be retained until all litigation,claims,or audit findings involving the records have been resolved. B. Access to records and data.At no additional cost,the records relating to the Agreement,including materials generated under the Agreement,shall be subject at all reasonable times to inspection,review or audit by RCO,personnel duly authorized by RCO,the Office of the State Auditor,and federal and state officials so authonzed by law,regulation or Agreement.This includes access to all information that supports the costs submitted for payment under the grant and all findings,conclusions, and recommendations of the sponsor's reports,including computer models and methodology for those models. C. Public Records.Sponsor acknowledges that the funding board is subject to chapter 42.56 RCW and that this Agreement and any records sponsor submits or has submitted to the State shall be a public record as defined in chapter 42.56 RCW. Additionally,in compliance with RCW 77.85.130(8),sponsor agrees to disclose any information in regards to expenditure of any funding received from the SRFB. By submitting any record to the state sponsor understands that the State may be requested to disclose or copy that record under the state public records law,currently codified at RCW 42.56. The sponsor warrants that it possesses such legal rights as are necessary to permit the State to disclose and copy such document to respond to a request under state public records laws. The Sponsor hereby agrees to release the State from any claims arising out of allowing such review or copying pursuant to a public records act request,and to indemnify against any claims arising from allowing such review or copying and pay the reasonable cost of state's defense of such claims. SECTION 12. TREATMENT OF ASSETS A. Assets shall remain in the possession of the sponsor for the duration of the project or applicable grant program.When the j sponsor discontinues use of the asset(s)for the purpose for which it was funded,RCO will require the sponsor to deliver the asset(s)to RCO,dispose of the asset according to ROO policies,or return the fair market value of the asset(s)to RCO.Assets shall be used only for the purpose of this Agreement,unless otherwise provided herein or approved by ROO in writing. B. The sponsor shall be responsible for any loss or damage to assets which results from the negligence of the sponsor or which results from the failure on the part of the sponsor to maintain and administer that asset in accordance with sound management practices. SECTION 13. RIGHT OF INSPECTION The sponsor shall provide right of access to the project to RCO,or any of its officers,or to any other authorized agent or official of the ', state of Washington or the federal government,at all reasonable times, in order to monitor and evaluate performance,compliance, '.. and/or quality assurance under this Agreement. ', If a landowner Agreement or other form of control and tenure has been executed,it will further stipulate and define the funding board and RCO's right to inspect and access lands acquired or developed with funding board assistance. SECTION 14. STEWARDSHIP AND MONITORING Sponsor agrees to perform monitoring and stewardship functions as staled in policy documents approved by the funding boards or ROO.Sponsor further agrees to utilize,where applicable and financially feasible,any monitoring protocols recommended by the funding board. PSAR Project Agreement-RCO#11-1219P Salmon Funding Accounts Chapter 77.85 RCW,Chapter 420 WAC Page 9 of 16 PROJAGR.RPT SECTION 15. DEBARMENT CERTIFICATION A. For Federally Funded Projects By signing the Agreement with RCO,the sponsor certifies that neither it nor its principals nor any other lower tier participant are presently debarred,suspended,proposed for debarment,declared ineligible or voluntarily excluded from participation in this transaction by any Federal department or agency. Further,the sponsor agrees not to enter into any arrangements or contracts related to this Agreement with any party that is on the"General Services Administration's Excluded from Federal Procurement or Non-procurement Programs at http://www.epls.gov, The sponsor(prospective lower tier participant)shall provide immediate written notice to ROO if at any time the prospective lower tier participant leams that the above certification was not correct when submitted or has become erroneous by reason of changed circumstances. B. For State Funded Projects I, By signing the Agreement with RCO,the sponsor certifies that neither it nor its principals nor any other lower tier participant are presently debarred,suspended,proposed for debarment,declared ineligible or voluntarily excluded from participation in this transaction by Washington State Labor and Industries. Further,the sponsor agrees not to enter into any arrangements or contracts related to this Agreement with any party that is on the"Contractors not Allowed to Bid on Public Works Projects"list at http://www.Ini.wa.govrrradesLicensing/PrevWage/AwardingAgencies/DebarredContractors/. - SECTION 16. PROJECT FUNDING '.. A. Additional Amounts.The funding board shall not be obligated to pay any amount beyond the dollar amount as identified in this Agreement,unless an additional amount has been approved in advance by the funding board or director and incorporated by written amendment into this Agreement. B. Before the Agreement. No expenditure made,or obligation incurred,by the sponsor before the project start date shall be eligible for grant funds,in whole or in part,unless specifically provided for by funding board policy,such as a waiver of retroactivity or program specific eligible pre-Agreement costs. For reimbursements of such costs,this Agreement must be fully executed and an original received by ROO.The dollar amounts identified in this Agreement may be reduced as necessary to exclude any such expenditure from reimbursement. C. After the period of performance.No expenditure made,or obligation incurred,following the period of performance shall be eligible,in whole or in part,for grant funds hereunder. In addition to any remedy the funding board may have under this Agreement,the grant amounts identified in this Agreement shall be reduced to exclude any such expenditure from participation. '.. SECTION 17. PROJECT REIMBURSEMENTS A. This contract is administered on a reimbursement basis.The sponsors may only request reimbursement after eligible and allowable costs have already been paid by the sponsor and remitted to their vendors. RCO will then reimburse the sponsor for those costs based upon RCO's percentage as defined in Section F of the Project Agreement of the amount billed to RCO.ROO - does not reimburse for donations which the sponsor may use as part of its percentage.All reimbursement requests must include proper documentation of expenditures as required by RCO. B. Compliance and Payment.The obligation of ROO to pay any amount(s)under this Agreement is expressly conditioned on strict compliance with the terms of this Agreement by the sponsor. C. Compliance and Retainage.ROO reserves the right to withhold disbursement of up to the final ten percent(10%)of the total amount of the grant to the sponsor until the project has been completed.A project is considered"complete"when: 1. All approved or required activities outlined in the Agreement are done; 2. On-site signs are in place(if applicable); 3. Afinal project report is submitted to and accepted by RCO; 4. Any other required documents are complete and submitted to RCO; 5. A final reimbursement request is submitted to RCO; 6. The completed project has been accepted by ROO; 7. Final amendments have been processed;and 8. Fiscal transactions are complete. '.. 9. RCO has accepted a final boundary map,if required for the project,for which the Agreement terms will apply in the future. D. Reimbursement Request Frequency.Sponsors are encouraged to send ROO a reimbursement request at least quarterly. Sponsors are required to submit a reimbursement request to RCO,at a minimum for each project at least once a year for reimbursable activities occurring between July 1 and June 30. Sponsors must refer to the most recently published/adopted RCO policies and procedures regarding reimbursement requirements. SECTION 18. ADVANCE PAYMENTS Advance payments of or in anticipation of goods or services to be provided under this Agreement are limited to grants approved by the Si and must comply with SRFB policy. See WAC 420-12-060(5). PSAR Project Agreement-RCO#11-121 9P Salmon Funding Accounts Chapter 77.85 RCW,Chapter 420 WAC Page 10 of 16 PROJAGR.RPT i SECTION 19. RECOVERY OF PAYMENTS In the event that the sponsor fails to expend funds under this Agreement in accordance with state and federal laws,and/or the provisions of the Agreement,or meet its percentage of the project total, RCO reserves the right to recover grant award funds in the amount equivalent to the extent of noncompliance in addition to any other remedies available at law or in equity. The sponsor shall reimburse RCO for any overpayment or erroneous payments made under the Agreement.Repayment by the sponsor of such funds under this recovery provision shall occurwithin 30 days of demand by ROO.Interest shall accrue at the rate of twelve percent(12%)per annum from the time that payment becomes due and owing. SECTION 20. COVENANTAGAINST CONTINGENT FEES The sponsor warrants that no person or selling agent has been employed or retained to solicit or secure this Agreement on an Agreement or understanding for a commission,percentage,brokerage or contingent fee,excepting bona fide employees or bona fide established agents maintained by the sponsor forthe purpose of securing business.RCO shall have the right,in the event of breach of this clause by the sponsor,to terminate this Agreement without liability or,in its discretion,to deduct from the Agreement grant amount or consideration or recover by other means the full amount of such commission,percentage,brokerage or contingent fee. SECTION 21. PROVISIONS APPLYING TO DEVELOPMENT,RENOVATION AND RESTORATION PROJECTS The following provisions shall be in force only if the project described in this Agreement is for development,renovation and restoration of land or facilities for outdoor recreation,habitat conservation,or salmon recovery: A. Document Review and Approval.The sponsor agrees to submit one copy of all development, renovation,restoration or construction plans and specifications to BOO for review prior to implementation.Review and approval by RCO will be for compliance with the terms of this Agreement. '... B_ Contracts for Development,Renovation or Restoration.Sponsors must follow any applicable state and/or required federal procurement procedures. If such procedures do not apply,Sponsor must follow these minimum procedures:(1)publish a notice to the public requesting bids/proposals for the project(2)specify in the notice the date for submittal of bidsfproposals(3)specify in the notice the general procedure and criteria for selection;and (4)comply with the same legal standards regarding unlawful discrimination based upon race,ethnicity,sex,or sex-orientation that are applicable to state agencies in selecting a bidder or proposer. This procedure creates no rights for the benefit of third parties,including any proposers,and may not be enforced or subject to review of any kind or manner by any other entity other than the RCO. Sponsors may be required to certify to the RCO they have followed any applicable state and/or federal procedures or the minimum procedure where the former procedures do not apply. C, Contract Change Order.Only change orders that impact the amount of funding or changes to the scope of the project as described to and approved by the funding board or RCO must receive priorwritten approval. '.. D. Control and Tenure.The sponsor must provide documentation that shows appropriate tenure(land owner Agreement, long term lease Agreement easement,or fee simple ownership)for the land proposed for development,renovation or restoration. The documentation must meet current RCO requirements. E. Nondiscrimination. Fxcept where a nondiscrimination clause required by a federal funding agency is used,the sponsor shall insert the following nondiscrimination clause in each contract for construction of this project: "During the performance of this contract,the contractor agrees to comply with all federal and state nondiscrimination laws,regulations and policies." F. Use of Best Management Practices. Project sponsors are encouraged to use best management practices developed as part of the Washington State Aquatic Habitat Guidelines(AHG)Program.The best management practices are described in three documents:"Stream Habitat Restoration Guidelines:Final Draft",2004;"Design of Road Culverts for Fish Passage",2003;and "Integrated Sireambank Protection Guidelines",2002.These documents and other information can be found on the AHG website. - SECTION 22. PROVISIONS APPLYING TO ACQUISITION PROJECTS The following provisions shall be in force only if the project described in this Agreement is for the acquisition of interest in real property (including easements)for outdoor recreation,habitat conservation,salmon recovery purposes,or farmland preservation: A Evidence of Land Value.Before disbursement of funds by RCO as provided under this Agreement,the sponsor agrees to supply documentation acceptable to RCO that the cost of the property rights acquired has been established according to funding board policy. B, Evidence of Title.The sponsor agrees to provide documentation that shows the type of ownership interest for the property that has been acquired.This shall be done before any payment of financial assistance. C. Legal Description of Real Property Rights Acquired.The legal description of the real property rights purchased with funding assistance provided through this project Agreement(and protected by a recorded conveyance of rights to the State of Washington)shall be incorporated into the Agreement before final payment. i PSAR Project Agreement-RCO#11-1 219P Salmon Funding Accounts Chapter 77.85 RCW,Chapter 420 WAC Page 11 of 16 '.. PROJAGR.RPT D. Conveyance of Rights to the State of Washington.Document securing long-term rights for the State of Washington. When real property rights(both fee simple and lesser interests)are acquired,the sponsor agrees to execute an appropriate document conveying certain rights and responsibilities to RCO,on behalf of the State of Washington. These documents include a Deed of Right,Assignment of Rights,Easements and/or Leases. The sponsor agrees to use document language provided by RCO,to record the executed document in the County where the real property lies,and to provide a copy of the recorded document to RCO.The document required will vary depending on the project type,the real property rights being acquired and whether or not those rights are being acquired in perpetuity. I. Deed of Right. The Deed of Right conveys to the people of the state of Washington the right to preserve,protect,and/or use the property for public purposes consistent with the fund source. Sponsors shall use this document when acquiring real property rights that include the underlying land. This document may also be applicable for those easements where the sponsor has acquired a perpetual easement for public purposes. 2. Assignment of Rights. The Assignment of Rights document transfers certain rights such as access and enforcement to RCO. Sponsors shall use this document when an easement or lease is being acquired for habitat conservation or salmon recovery purposes. The Assignment of Rights requires the signature of the underlying landowner and must be incorporated by reference in the easement document. 3. Easements and Leases. The sponsor may incorporate required language from the Deed of Right or Assignment of Rights directly into the easement or lease document,thereby eliminating the requirement for a separate document. Language will depend on the situation;sponsor must obtain RCO approval on the draft language prior to executing the easement or lease. E. Real Property Acquisition and Relocation Assistance 1. When federal funds are part of this Agreement,the Sponsor agrees to comply with the terms and conditions of the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970,84 Stat.1894(1970)--Public Law 91-646,as amended by the Surface Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act,PL 100-17-1987,and applicable regulations and procedures of the federal agency implementing that Act. 2. When state funds are part of this Agreement,the sponsor agrees to comply with the terms and conditions of the Uniform '.. Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policy of the State of Washington,Chapter 8.26.010 RCW,and Chapter 468-100 WAG 3. Housing and Relocation.In the event that housing and relocation costs,as required.by federal law set out in subsection(1) above and/or state law set out in subsection(2)above,are involved in the execution of this project,the sponsor agrees to provide any housing and relocation assistance required. F. Buildings and Structures. In general,grant funds are to be used for outdoor recreation,habitat conservation,or salmon recovery. Sponsors agree to remove or demolish ineligible structures. Sponsors must consult RCO regarding compliance with section 9- Archaeological and Cultural Resources before structures are removed or demolished. G. Archaeological and Cultural Resources. The sponsor agrees that any real property interests acquired under this Agreement,if to be subject to land disturbing activities in the future,is subject to Governor's Executive Order 05-05 or the National Preservation Historic Act(S. 106). The sponsor further agrees that ground disturbing activity will not occur until RCO has been notified and determines if a cultural resources review is needed. SECTION 23. RESTRICTION ON CONVERSION OF REAL PROPERTYAND/OR FACILITIES TO OTHER USES The sponsor shall not at any time convert any real property or facility acquired,developed,and/or restored pursuant to this Agreement _ to uses other than those purposes for which funds were approved without prior approval of the funding board in compliance with applicable statutes,rules,and funding board policies. It is the intent of the funding board's conversion policy,current or as amended in the future,that all real property or facilities acquired,developed and/or restored with funding assistance remain in the public domain in perpetuity unless otherwise identified in the Agreement or as approved by the funding board. Determination of whether a conversion has occurred shall be based upon applicable law and RCFB/SRFB policies. When a conversion has been determined to have occurred,the sponsor is required to remedy the conversion per established funding board policies. SECTION 24. CONSTRUCTION,OPERATION,USEAND MAINTENANCE OF ASSISTED PROJECTS For acquisition,development,renovation and restoration projects,sponsors must ensure that properties or facilities assisted with funding board funds,including undeveloped sites,are built,operated,used,and maintained: A. According to applicable federal,state,and local laws and regulations,including public health standards and building codes. B. In a reasonably safe condition for the project's intended use. , C. Throughout its estimated life so as to prevent undue deterioration. D. In compliance with all federal and state nondiscrimination laws,regulations and policies. PSAR Project Agreement-RCO#11-1219P Salmon Funding Accounts Chapter 77.85 RCW,Chapter 420 WAC Page 12 of is '.. PROJAGR.RPT ( For acquisition,development,renovation and restoration projects,facilities open and accessible to the general public must: j E, Be constructed and maintained to meet or exceed the minimum requirements of the most current local or state codes, Uniform Federal Accessibility Standards,guidelines,or miss,including but not limited to:the International Building Code,the Americans with Disabilities Act,and the Architectural Barrens Act,as updated. F. Appear attractive and inviting to the public except for brief installation,construction, or maintenance periods. G. Be available for use by the general public without reservation at reasonable hours and times of the year,according to the type of area or facility. SECTION 25. INCOME AND INCOME USE A. Income. 1. Compatible source.The source of any income generated in a funded project or project area must be compatible with the funding source and the Agreement. 2. Fees.User and/or other fees may be charged in connection with land acquired or facilities developed with funding board grants if the fees are consistent with the: (a) Value of any service(s)furnished; (b) Value of any opportunities furnished;and (c) Prevailing range of public fees in the state for the activity involved. Excepted are Firearms and Archery Range Recreation Program safety classes(firearm and/or hunter)for which a '.., facility/range fee must not be charged(Chapter 79A.25.210 RCW). B, Income use.Regardless of whether income or fees in a project work site(including entrance, utility corridor permit,cattle grazing, timber harvesting,farming,etc.)are gained during or after the reimbursement period cited in the Agreement,unless precluded by state orfederal law,the revenue may only be used to offset: 1. The sponsor's matching funds; 2. The projects total cost; 3. The expense of operation,maintenance,stewardship,monitoring,and/or repair of the facility or program assisted by the funding board grant; 4. The expense of operation,maintenance,stewardship,monitoring, and/or repair of other similar units in the sponsor's system;and/or ', 5, Capital expenses for similar acquisition and/or development. SECTION 26. PREFERENCES FOR RESIDENTS Sponsors shall not express a preference for users of grant assisted projects on the basis of residence(including preferential reservation, membership,and/or permit systems)except that reasonable differences in admission and other fees may be maintained on the basis of residence. Even so,the funding board discourages the imposition of differential fees.Fees for nonresidents must not exceed twice the fee imposed on residents.Where there is no fee for residents but a fee is charged to nonresidents,the nonresident fee shall not exceed the amount that would be imposed on residents at comparable state or local public facilities. SECTION 27. PROVISIONS RELATED TO CORPORATE(INCLUDING NONPROFIT)SPONSORS A corporate sponsor,including any nonprofit sponsor,shall: A. Maintain corporate status with the state,including registering with the Washington Secretary of State's office,throughout the sponsor's obligation to the project as identified in the Agreement. B. Notify RCO prior to corporate dissolution. Within 30 days of dissolution the sponsor shall name a qualified successor that will agree in writing to assume any on-going project responsibilities.A qualified successor is any party eligible to apply for funds in the subject grant program and capable of complying with the terms and conditions of this Agreement.RCO will process an amendment transferring the sponsor's obligation to the qualified successor if requirements are met. C. Sites or facilities open to the public may not require exclusive use,(e.g.,members only). SECTION 28. LIABILITY INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR FIREARMS AND ARCHERY RANGE SPONSORS A. The sponsor of a firearms or archery range recreation project shall procure an endorsement,or other addition,to liability insurance it may currently carry,or shall procure a new policy of liability insurance,in a total coverage amount the sponsor deems adequate to ensure it will have resources to pay successful claims of persons who may be killed or injured,or suffer damage to property,while present at the range facility to which this grant is related, of by reason of being in the vicinity of that L. facility;provided that the coverage shall be at least one million dollars($1,000,000)for the death of,or injury to,each person. B. The liability insurance policy,including any endorsement or addition,shall name Washington State,the funding board,and EGO as additional insured and shall be in a form approved by the funding board or director. PSAR Project Agreement-RCO#11-1219P Salmon Funding Accounts Chapter 77.85 RCW,Chapter 420 WAG Page 13 of 1e PROJAGR,RPT C. The policy,endorsement or other addition,or a similar liability insurance policy meeting the requirements of this section,shall be '.. kept in force throughout the sponsors obligation to the project as identified in this Agreement. D. The policy, as modified by any endorsement or other addition,shall provide that the issuing company shall give written notice to RCO not less than thirty(30)calendar days in advance of any cancellation of the policy by the insurer,and within ten (10) calendar days following any termination of the policy by the sponsor. E. The requirement of Subsection A through D above shall not apply if the sponsor is a federal,state,or municipal government which has established a program of self-insurance or a policy of self-insurance with respect to claims arising from its facilities or activities generally,including such facilities as firearms or archery ranges,when the applicant declares and describes that program or policy as a part of its application to the funding board. '.. F. By this requirement,the funding board and RCO does not assume any duty to any individual person with respect to death,injury, or damage to property which that person may suffer while present at,or in the vicinity of,the facility to Which this grant relates. Any such person,or any other person making claims based on such death,injury,or damage,must look to the sponsor,or _ others,for any and all remedies that may be available by law. SECTION 29. REQUIREMENTS OF THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE If the project has been approved by the National Park Service,US Department of the Interior,for funding assistance from the federal Land and Water Conservation Fund(LWCF),the"Project Agreement General Provisions"in the LWCF State Assistance Program Federal Financial Assistance Manual are also made part of this Agreement. The sponsor shall abide by these LWCF General Provisions,in addition to this Agreement,as they now exist or are hereafter amended. Further,the sponsor agrees to provide RCO with reports or documents needed to meet the requirements of the LWCF General Provisions. SECTION 30. FARMLAND PRESERVATION ACCOUNT For projects funded through the Washington Wildlife and Recreation Program Farmland Preservation Account,the following sections will not apply if covered separately in a recorded RCO approved Agricultural Conservation Easement. • Section 8-Acknowledgement and Signs, • Section 10-Hazardous Substances, • Section 14-Stewardship and Monitoring • Section 22-Provisions Applying to Acquisition Projects,Sub-sections F and G. '.. • Section 23-Restriction on Conversion of Real Property and/or Facilities to Other Uses,and • Section 24-Construction,Operation,Use and Maintenance of Assisted Projects,Sub-sections E, F,and G • Section 25-Income and Income Use 1, SECTION 31. ORDER OF PRECEDENCE This Agreement is entered into,pursuant to,and under the authority granted by applicable federal and state laws.The provisions of - the Agreement shall be construed to conform to those laws.In the event of an inconsistency in the terms of this Agreement,or between its terms and any applicable statute,rule,or policy or procedure,the inconsistency shall be resolved by giving precedence in the following order: A. Applicable federal and/or state statutes,regulations,policies and procedures including RCO/funding board policies and procedures,applicable federal Office of Management and Budget(OMB)circulars and federal and state executive orders; B. Project agreement including attachments; C. Special Conditions; D. Standard Terms and Conditions of the Project Agreement. SECTION 32. AMENDMENTS '.. Amendments to this Agreement shall be binding only if in writing and signed by personnel authorized to bind each of the parties except period of performance extensions and minor scope adjustments need only be signed by RCO's director or designee. SECTION 33. LIMITATION OF AUTHORITY Only ROO or RCO's delegate by writing(delegation to be made prior to action)shall have the express,implied,or apparent authority to alter,amend,modify, or waive any clause or condition of this Agreement Furthermore,any alteration,amendment,modification,or waiver of any clause or condition of this Agreement is not effective or binding unless made in writing and signed by ROO. SECTION 34. WAIVER OF DEFAULT Waiver of any default shall not be deemed to be a waiver of any subsequent default.Waiver or breach of any provision of the Agreement shall not be deemed to be a waiver of any other or subsequent breach and shall not be construed to be a modification of the terms of the Agreement unless stated to be such in writing,signed by the director, or the director's designee,and attached to the original Agreement. SECTION 35. APPLICATION REPRESENTATIONS--MISREPRESENTATIONS OR INACCURACY OR BREACH The funding board and ROO rely on the sponsor's application in making its determinations as to eligibility for,selection for,and scope of,funding grants.Any misrepresentation,error or inaccuracy in any part of the application may be deemed a breach of this Agreement. PSAR Project Agreement-RCO#11-1219P Salmon Funding Accounts Chapter 77.85 RCW,Chapter 420 WAC Page 14 of 16 PROJAGR.RPT '.. SECTION 36. SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE The funding board and RCO may enforce this Agreement by the remedy of specific performance,which usually will mean completion of the project as described in this Agreement.However,the remedy of specific performance shall not be the sole or exclusive remedy available to RCO.No remedy available to the funding board or RCO shall be deemed exclusive.The funding board or RCO may elect to exercise any,a combination of,or all of the remedies available to it under this Agreement,or under any provision of law,common law,or equity. I SECTION 37. TERMINATION The funding board and RCO will require strict compliance by the sponsorwith all the terms of this Agreement including,but not limited to,the requirements of the applicable statutes,rules and all funding board and RCO policies,and with the representations of the sponsor in its application for a grant as finally approved by the funding board A. For Cause. The funding board or the director may suspend or terminate the obligation to provide funding to the sponsor under this Agreement i. In the event of any breach by the sponsor of any of the sponsors obligations under this Agreement;or li ii.If the sponsor fails to make progress satisfactory to the funding board or director toward completion of the project by the completion date set out in this Agreement. Included in progress is adherence to milestones and other defined deadlines In the event this Agreement is terminated by the funding board or director,under this section or any other section after any portion of the grant amount has been paid to the sponsor under this Agreement,the funding board or director may require that any amount paid be repaid to RCO for redeposit into the account from which the funds were derived. B. Non Availability of Funds. The obligation of the RCO to make payments is contingent on the availability of state and federal funds through legislative appropriation and state allotment. If amounts sufficient to fund the grant made under this Agreement are not appropriated to RCO for expenditure forthis Agreement in any biennial fiscal period,RCO shall not be obligated to pay any remaining unpaid portion of this grant unless and until the necessary action by the Legislature or the Office of Financial Management occurs. If RCO participation is suspended under this section for a continuous period of one year,RCO's obligation to provide any future funding under this Agreement shall terminate. Termination of the Agreement under this section is not subject to appeal by the sponsor. C. For Convenience. Except as otherwise provided in this Agreement,RCO may,by ten(10)days written notice,beginning on the second day after the mailing,terminate this Agreement,in whole or in part. If this Agreement is so terminated,RCO shall be liable only for payment required under the terms of this Agreement for services rendered or goods delivered prior to the effective date of termination. SECTION 38. DISPUTE HEARING Except as may otherwise be provided in this Agreement,when a dispute arises between the sponsor and the funding board,which cannot be resolved,either party may request a dispute hearing according to the process set out in this section.Either party's request for a dispute hearing must be in writing and clearly state: A. The disputed issues; B. The relative positions of the parties; C. The sponsors name,address,project title,and the assigned project number. In order for this section to apply to the resolution of any specific dispute or disputes,the other party must agree in writing that the procedure under this section shall be used to resolve those specific issues.The dispute shall be heard by a panel of three persons consisting of one person chosen by the sponsor,one person chosen by the director,and a third person chosen by the two persons initially appointed.If a third person cannot be agreed on,the third person shall be chosen by the funding board's chair. Any hearing under this section shall be informal,with the specific processes to be determined by the disputes panel according to the nature and complexity of the issues involved.The process may be solely based on written material if the parties so agree.The disputes panel shall be governed by the provisions of this Agreement in deciding the disputes. 1, The parties shall be bound by the decision of the disputes panel,unless the remedy directed by that panel shall be without the authority of either or both parties to perform,as necessary,or is otherwise unlawful. Request for a disputes hearing under this section by either party shall be delivered or mailed to the other party.The request shall be delivered or mailed within thirty(30)days of the date the requesting party has received notice of the action or position of the other party which it wishes to dispute.The written Agreement to use the process under this section for resolution of those issues shall be delivered or mailed by the receiving party to the requesting party within thirty(30)days of receipt by the receiving party of the request. All costs associated with the implementation of this process shall be shared equally by the parties. , SECTION 39. ATTORNEYS'FEES In the event of litigation or other action brought to enforce contract terms,each party agrees to bear its own attorney fees and costs. ',. PSAR Project Agreement-RCO#11-1 219P Salmon Funding Accounts Chapter 77.85 RCW,Chapter 420 WAC Page 15 of 1e PROJAGR.RPT SECTION 40. GOVERNING LAWNENUE �I This Agreement shall be construed and interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State of Washington. In the event of a lawsuit involving this Agreement,venue shall be in Thurston County Superior Court if legally proper;otherwise venue shall be in a county '.. where the project is situated.The sponsor,by execution of this Agreement acknowledges thejurisdiction of the courts of the State of j Washington. In the cases where this Agreement is between the funding board and a federally recognized Indian Tribe,the following governing I lawlvenue applies: A. Notwithstanding the above venue provision,if the State of Washington intends to initiate a lawsuit against a federally recognized - - Indian tribe relating to the performance,breach or enforcement of this Agreement,it shall so notify the Tribe. If the Tribe believes that a good faith basis exists for subject matter jurisdiction of such a lawsuit in federal court,the Tribe shall so notify the State '.. within five days of receipt of such notice and state the basis for such jurisdiction. If the Tribe so notifies the State,the State shall bring such lawsuit in federal court;otherwise the State may sue the Tribe in the Thurston County Superior Court. Interpretation of the Agreement shall be according to applicable State law,except to the extent preempted by federal or tribal law. In the event suit is brought in federal court and the federal court determines that it lacks subject matterjurisdiction to resolve the dispute between the State and Tribal Party,then the parties agree to venue in Thurston County Superior Court. B. Any judicial award,determination,order,decree or other relief,whether in law or equity or otherwise,resulting from such a lawsuit shall be binding and enforceable on the parties. Any money judgment or award against a Tribe,tribal officers and members,or the State of Washington and its officers and employees may exceed the amount provided for in Section F-Project Funding of the Agreement in order to satisfy the judgment. C. The Tribe hereby waives its sovereign immunity to legal actions as may be brought pursuant to this section,and to the enforcement of any judgment from such legal actions. This waiver is not for the benefit of any third party and shall not be enforceable by any third party or by any assignee of the parties.In any enforcement action,the parties shall bear their own enforcement costs,including attorneys'fees. '.. SECTION 41. SEVERABILITY The provisions of this Agreement are intended to be severable. If any term or provision is illegal or invalid for any reason whatsoever, such illegality or invalidity shall not affect the validity of the remainder of the Agreement i I PSAR Project Agreement-RCO#11-1219P Salmon Funding Accounts Chapter 77.85 RCW,Chapter 420 WAC Page 16 of 16 PROJAGR.RPT '.. i Eligible Scope Activities Project Sponsor: City of Kent Project Number: 11-1219 '.. Project Title: Downey Farmstead Final Design Project Type: Planning Program: - Puget Sound Acq. &Restoration Approval: 12/9/2011 Planning Metrics Worksite#1, Downey Farmstead Property Targeted salmonid ESU/DPS: Chinook Salmon-Puget Sound ESU, Chum Salmon-Puget Sound/Strait of Georgia ESU, Coho Salmon-Puget Sound/Strait of Georgia ESU, Pink Salmon-unidentified ESU, Steelhead-Puget Sound DPS *Chinook-Primary species Targeted species(non-ESU species): _ Bull Trout, Cutthroat Area Encompassed(acres): 21.8 Design for Salmon restoration Final design and permitting '.. Name of Plan: Preliminary Design Report Downey Farmstead Restoration March 23, 2011 Herrera Environmental Consultants 2200 Sixth Ave., Suite 1100 ICI Seattle,WA 98121 i i ELIGREIM.RPT January 24,2012 Page. 1 Eligible Scope Activities Description of Plan: The report describes preliminary design analyses performed for the Downey Farmstead Restoration Project, key features of the preliminary project design, and additional work needed to !, support final design and permitting for the project as presented. The project preliminary design included a comprehensive assessment of existing site conditions and potential restoration scenarios. The preliminary design seeks to maximize juvenile salmonid rearing and refuge habitat within the '.... available site area while balancing the '.. need to maintain vehicular traffic on Frager Road through the site. The !.. report includes an overview of the '.... project that describes the history and goals of project development to date; discussion of existing site conditions; discussion of habitat restoration plan development including alternatives that were analyzed and used as a basis for selecting the prefered alternative for detailed design; a summary of technical analyses performed to support design development and establish important information needed for project permitting and collaboration with regulatory agencies and the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe; a description of key aspects of the preliminary design plans, and additional design analyses needed to finish the design; a discussion of the regulatory permits and approvals needed to begin !. project construction. Cultural Resources I Cultural resources 1, ELIGREIM.RPT January 24,2012 Page: 2 '.. Milestone Report By Project Project Number: 11-1219 P Project Name: Downey Farmstead Final Design Sponsor: Kent City of Project Manager: Elizabeth Butler X Preliminary Design to RCO70707, Completed with 08-1659 funding. '. Project StartEligible pre-ageement expenses per Manual 18(2011)page 65 i Data Gathering StartedCity of Kent project engineer assigned. i Progress Report Submitted 06/30/2012 i Annual Project Billing 07/31/2012 Required by this date. il Applied for Permits 08/31/2012 I Cultural Resources Complete 08/31/2012 Complete Survey. Progress Report Submitted 12/31/2012 Draft Design to RCO 1213112012 Draft Final Design deliverables as described in Appendix D Manual 18 (2012) i Final Design to RCO 04/30/2013 Final Design deliverables as described '.. in Appendix D Manual 18(2012) '.. i Progress Report Submitted 06/30/2013 ,I ! Annual Project Billing 07/31/2013 Permits Complete 10/31/2013 Special Conditions Met 10/31/2013 Section 106-confirm APE matches grant scope. Final Report in PRISM 12/31/2013 PROJECT CLOSING. All expenditures must be prior to this date. i Agreement End Date 12/31/2013 Final Billing to RCO 02/28/2014 Provide your final invoice and report within 60 days of Agreement End Date. X=Milestone Complete 1 =Critical Milestone I I, 1MILESTO.RPT January 24,2012 Page: 1 Press Release Template i City of Kent offered grant to develop a plan or assessment for salmon recovery. (Kent)-City of Kent was awarded a grant of$253,581.00 from the Puget Sound Acquisition & ' Restoration. The grant was awarded by the Salmon Recovery Funding Board(SRFB),and will be used for the following: The City of Kent will use this grant to complete the design and get permits for a project to realign Frager Road to allow creation of a side channel network and expanded floodplain at the Downey farmstead on the south bank of the Green River.The goal of the project is '.... to create habitat for Chinook salmon to rear, rest and hide from predators. A secondary goal is to create additional flood storage to help alleviate flooding in urban and agricultural areas. The road alignment will provide a greater buffer from the river and will continue to be open to vehicular, bicycle and pedestrian access adjacent to river. Kent will contribute $46,419 from a local grant. _ There were thirty-nine applications submitted for consideration in the Puget Sound Acquisition & Restoration. Each project went through an evaluation process prior to being recommended for funding. The SRFB Board approved funding for projects on Friday, December 9, 2011, Funding forthe Puget Sound Acquisition &Restoration comes(new). City of Kent will leverage local '.. contributions totaling$46,419.00 with grant monies to implement the project. Total estimated project cost is$300,000.00. SRFB is the state's administrator of the grant program. Contact: Alex Murillo, (253)856-5528(sponsor project manager) Elizabeth Butler, (360)725-3944, elizabeth.butler@rco.wa.gov(SRFB project manager) i a mm e� r� m � p a as 4 m0 � e p � � � 4 � � p m � q ® �q � �. � a9 6 J +� i 4� � b oY � u p � � G � q a ® � � Q 9 � / a � � � � � ® � a. fib �li x, � rl i �{ � �� � � X � G W �m y � � � � w ie 6 � 0 gy tl tlh � r � i , +si ",c r ��'�� �' eF"r'. � M N � J �� „ J q. M:Wb. � /%i/ i � P ..L,v ip i � 'WY ��' � �. � a, � �ry � ,� � w n� %+� l 11 � ��� r �, � � %� � � � �l� �� � � ' f' i �; %� � , � 1 �� i�or�+ i '' � i I�'}� i-.;.. �� a m ,maA'�ix4 " � pA"4JJm�?p' , w'} yFR�rrY�' i ,. � U f p� 4 c -AT 4 + 4 ry M rf Y� .w V.• I�IG ✓ � +H 4 Y' /Y�� W f i M q � I Vd, M ¢ u , Ltd w WN AC.�re I Y 1 � �"( U A ! £ r sy.' I. y Z K O k �Ydlpl o o r Pc w.d o V Min R a✓x yy44ryry fin. ,'F`M I �� �• r v � , 1 i KENT Agenda Item: Consent Calendar — 70 TO: City Council DATE: February 21, 2012 SUBJECT: North Park Storm Drainage — Accept as Complete MOTION: Accept the North Park Storm Drainage Project as complete and release retainage to King Construction, Inc., upon receipt of standard releases from the state and release of any liens. The original contract amount was $176,178.05. The final contract amount was $139,888.26. SUMMARY: This project consists of 312 feet of 8-inch storm sewer pipe, as well as storm sewer structures and appurtenances to help alleviate localized flooding in the City's North Park Neighborhood. This project is now complete and ready to be accepted by City Council. EXHIBITS: None RECOMMENDED BY: Public Works Director BUDGET IMPACTS: Funding for this project came from the City's Sanitary Sewer Fund. Z KENT HA r Agenda Item: Bids - 9A TO: City Council DATE: February 21, 2012 SUBJECT: Horseshoe Bend and Upper Russell Road Restoration Planting MOTION: Move to award the Horseshoe Bend and Upper Russell Road Restoration Planting Project contract to Restoration Logistics in the amount of $87,472.62, and authorize the Mayor to sign all necessary documents, subject to final terms and conditions acceptable to the City Attorney and Public Works Director. SUMMARY: The project consists of installing approximately 15,600 native plants in a stream buffer, wetland, new stream channel and live stake planting area. The plants vary from trees in 5 gallon size containers to herbaceous plugs. High ground- water exists throughout the project site. The herbaceous plants will be installed during the spring of 2012. This work is required to provide mitigation for impacts caused by the City's secondary levee construction projects. EXHIBITS: Public Works memo dated 2/8/2012 RECOMMENDED BY: Public Works Director BUDGET IMPACTS: The Horseshoe Bend portion of the project will be paid out of the $10,000,000 State Grant. The Upper Russell Road portion of the project will be paid for out of the City's stormwater utility. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Timothy J. LaPorte, P.E., Public Works Director KENT Address: 220 Fourth Avenue S. W A S H I N c 7 o N Kent, WA. 98032-5895 Phone: 253-856-5500 Fax: 253-856-6500 DATE: February 8, 2012 TO: Mayor Cooke and Kent City Council FROM: Timothy J. LaPorte, P.E. Public Works Director RE: Horseshoe Bend and Upper Russell Road Restoration Planting Bid opening for this project was held on February 7, 2012 with eight (8) bids received. The low bid was submitted by Restoration Logistics in the amount of $87,472.62. The Engineer's estimate was $96,710.55. The Public Works Director recommends awarding this contract to Restoration Logistics. Bid Summary 01. Restoration Logistics $87,472.62 02. Buckley Nursery $98,589.97 03. Lawn Salon Landscaping Services $108,956.88 04. Jansen Inc. $111,539.68 05. T. Miller Construction $117,867.55 06. Terra Dynamics $119,028.14 07. Henderson Partners Gig Harbor $133,806.81 08. Westwater Construction $170,453.18 Engineer's Estimate $96,710.55 REPORTS FROM STAFF, COUNCIL COMMITTEES, AND SPECIAL COMMITTEES A. Council President B. Mayor C. Administration D. Economic & Community Development E. Operations F. Parks & Human Services G. Public Safety H. Public Works I. Regional Fire Authority J. Other K. Other KENT WASHINGTON OPERATIONS COMMITTEE MINUTES January 17, 2012 Committee Members Present: Les Thomas (chair), Dennis Higgins, Jamie Perry The meeting was called to order by L Thomas at 4:00 p.m. 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES DATED DECEMBER 6, 2011. J. Perry moved to approve the Operations Committee minutes dated December 6, 2011. D. Higgins seconded the motion, which passed 3-0. 2. APPROVAL OF VOUCHERS DATED NOVEMBER 30, DECEMBER 15 AND DECEMBER 30, 2011. D. Higgins moved to approve the vouchers dated November 30, December 15 and 30, 2011. J. Perry seconded the motion, which passed 3-0. 3. MOVE TO RECOMMEND COUNCIL AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR TO SIGN A LEASE AGREEMENT WITH ALLIANCE ONE FOR A PAY STATION LOCATED AT THE KENT MUNICIPAL COURT, SUBJECT TO FINAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS ACCEPTABLE TO THE PARKS DIRECTOR AND CITY ATTORNEY. Margaret Yetter, Court Administrator for Kent Municipal Court, provided information regarding the lease agreement with Alliance One, collection agency. The Agreement is for an Alliance One representative to be present at the municipal court during operating business hours to collect court fines and related costs. The pay station is not restricted to Kent Court fines and will accept all Alliance account fees. J. Perry moved to recommend Council authorize the Mayor to sign a Lease Agreement with Alliance One for a pay station located at the Kent Municipal Court, subject to final terms and conditions acceptable to the Parks Director and City Attorney. D. Higgins seconded the motion, which passed 3-0. 4. RECOMMEND COUNCIL ADOPT A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE CERTIFICATION OF $3,452,428 FOR THE PANTHER LAKE ANNEXATION SALES TAX CREDIT FOR THE PERIOD JULY 1, 2012 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2013. B. Nachlinger made a correction to the motion summary that the certification to the State of Washington Department of Revenue needs to be before March 1, not March 31. If approved, the motion will go to council for recommendation on February 7. Compared to last year, it is $400k less and takes into account the issue of revenue that was expected in last year's budget. D. Higgins moved council to approve the certification of$3,452,428 for the Panther Lake annexation sales tax credit for the period July 1, 2012 through June 30, 2013. J. Perry seconded the motion,which passed 3-0. Operations Committee Minutes January 17, 2012 Page: 2 S. RECOMMEND COUNCIL APPROVE AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 1851 REGARDING CODE FEES CLARIFYING THE ASSESSMENT OF BUSINESS LICENSE AND TECHNOLOGY FEES FOR THOSE LICENSES, AS WELL AS INTERNATIONAL FIRE CODE REVIEW FEES. This item was brought back to Committee for clarification of certain areas. Under the business license fees for multi-family apartment and condominium businesses, the fee will be based on the number of swelling units, not by the number of employees at the complex. B. Nachlinger clarified the numbers are the same as were in the original ordinance. Under Subsection D of Section 2, contractors doing business in Kent whose physical location is outside the city of Kent shall be assessed a $100 fee. All applications that come in after July 1, 2012 will be prorated by Finance. Final clarification is to Exhibit A, and the cost per business Technology Fee. All review fees are subject to Technology fees. There was further discussion regarding the multi family dwelling. J. Perry proposed increasing the fees to be more in line with what businesses are paying based on the number of employees. Councilmember D. Higgins and L. Thomas agreed. P. Barry, Assistant Finance Director, provided a spreadsheet reflecting the proposed change. J. Perry recommend council amend Resolution No. 1851 regarding code fees clarifying the assessment of business license and technology fees for those licenses, as well as international fire code review fees. D. Higgins seconded the motion, which passed 3-0. J. Perry moved to amend the motion to include the new business license fee structure for multi family dwelling units as shown in the handout. D. Higgins seconded the motion,which passed 3-0. The rest of Council will be notified of the amendment at the meeting tonight and copies will be distributed to them as well as the Clerk. 6. ORDINANCE AMENDING KCC 2.53 INCREASING THE TERMS OF APPOINTMENT FOR HUMAN SERVICES COMMISSION YOUTH REPRESENTATIVES (REMOVED). There is no urgency on this item, therefore, T. Brubaker, City Attorney requested Item #6 be removed and sent through the Parks Committee, where it would normally be addressed. L. Thomas agreed. 7. MOVE TO RECOMMEND COUNCIL AMEND KCC 4.02 INCREASING THE NUMBER AND PROVIDING FOR VARIABLE TERMS FOR THE ARTS COMMISSION YOUTH REPRESENTATIVES. This will allow a student to serve on the commission for up to three years. Each member has one vote. This will be on the Consent calendar of the Council agenda at tonight's meeting. J. Perry moved to recommend council amend KCC 4.02 increasing the number and providing for variable terms for the arts commission youth representatives. D. Higgins seconded the motion, which passed 3-0. Operations Committee Minutes January 17, 2012 Page: 3 S. TWO-YEAR BUDGET (INFORMATION ONLY) The Administration and Council have discussed a two-year budget versus a one year budget in the past; however council never felt the change was necessary. After this past budget process, Council has started the discussion again. J. Hodgson, Chief Administrative Officer, stated the discussion from the Operations Committee will determine if it will be brought before the whole council for authorization. Handouts were distributed that list cities that do and don't have two year budgets and the process involved. J. Hodgson, B. Nachlinger, Finance Director and T. Brubaker, City Attorney, explained the process in detail. J. Hodgson noted that if there is an interest, action would have to be taken by June, if not earlier, of this year. The L. Thomas feels it would be a benefit and huge cost savings. J. Perry agreed and noted most of the big cities have two year budgets. D. Higgins is overall in favor, however, would like public input before proceeding, which he would pursue. The topic would be an agenda item at the February council retreat and a decision from them to move forward would be determined at that time. 9. 2012 INSURANCE PROGRAMS UPDATE (INFORMATION ONLY) C. Hills, City Risk Manager, reviewed changes to the cities various insurance programs for the 2012 year. He provided updates on the Liability Insurance, Worker Compensation and Property Insurance. C. Hills commented on what amounts other local larger cities have for their Self-Insured Retention (SIR). J. Perry commented that she would not want to see Kent's be any larger than the existing $250,000. The Property Insurance was discussed and noted that the ShoWare Center has their own carrier because our carrier doesn't like them as a flood risk. The sand bags and levee concerns do not reflect favorably for the cities carrier but does not affect the carrier for the ShoWare's coverage. 10. SUMMARY FINANCIAL REPORT AS OF NOVEMBER 30, 2011(INFORMATION ONLY) B. Nachlinger, Finance Director, provided the highlights of the October financials. In summary, based on information available through November, General Fund revenues are estimated to end about $2,784,500 or 4.6% under budget, while expenditures are projected to end the year about $3,505,792 or 5.7% below the budget. This results in a projected ending fund balance of $2,305,578 or 4.5% of the expenditure budget. The final 2011 figures will be received in April. The meeting was adjourned at 5:10 p.m. by L. Thomas. Pamela Clark Operations Committee Secretary iffi% �w��0lf�1rIT Kent Parks and Human Services Committee a r Meeting Minutes of January 19, 2012 Call to Order: Chair Debbie Ranniger called the meeting to order at 5:03 p.m. Council Present: Chair Debbie Ranniger, Elizabeth Albertson, Dana Ralph Added item: Human Services Commission Amending KCC 2.53 Ordinance - Adopt Added item: Project Kent Hope, as proposed at city council meeting on January 17. Item 1. Meeting Minutes - Approve Elizabeth Albertson moved to approve the minutes of November 17, 2011. Dana Ralph seconded. The motion passed 3-0. Item 2. Communities Puttina Prevention to Work Grant Update - INFO ONLY Jeff Watling updated the committee on the bicycle and pedestrian work that has been accomplished under the Communities Putting Prevention to Work (CPPW) grant. He referred to the council's strategic goals of connecting people and places. The report takes a much more integrated approach with bike and pedestrian pathways throughout Kent. Hope Gibson, Superintendent of Parks Planning and Development reported that the focus of this project was to look at the bicycle/pedestrian system in a more holistic fashion. Traditionally, different city departments are responsible for different parts of the system. On-street bicycle/pedestrian planning is handled through Public Works and off-street bicycle/pedestrian planning is done by the Parks Department. Our belief is that by looking at the system as a whole, we can more easily make critical connections between these two portions of the system, and can improve connectivity throughout the city. As a result, the overall system will function better, and will be better used. The primary task associated with a King County Public Health grant the city received was to perform bicycle/pedestrian planning. Two other secondary tasks were to create a healthy food procurement policy for city meetings and to recommend policy changes to improve healthy food access to the community. Both of which are essentially complete. Review Existing Plans Existing bicycle/pedestrian planning that has been performed by transportation and parks was reviewed. This included relevant sections of the Transportation Master Plan (TMP), the Non-Motorized Transportation Study, the Midway Plan, and the Parks and Open Space Plan. Assess Existing System A review of existing biking/pedestrian network was performed. The goal was to confirm existing records and explore a few areas to identify options for key connections. Citizen's Advisory Committee A group of citizens was assembled to discuss appropriate priorities for future planning. They met for six weeks, two times per week for 2-1/2 hours. They recommended four primary policies: 1. The system should be safer, with a focus on education, engineering and enforcement. 2. The system should be more inclusive, considering the needs of all users. 3. The system should be better-connected—across the city, to destinations and to regional facilities. 4. The system should be more user-friendly—easier to navigate, more attractive, and more accommodating of users' needs. Their policy recommendations will be included in the final report. In addition, the committee recommended this preliminary document be followed up by a comprehensive Trails, Bikeways and Paths plan, so that the general policies and recommendations of this document could be developed, along with a plan for implementation. Public Outreach One of the grant's priorities was looking at ways to improve the health of minorities and the economically disadvantaged. From the very beginning of this project, we felt that the goals of our pedestrian/biking planning proposal were very consistent with this priority. Our rationale was that if we were successful in planning a truly comprehensive, inclusive system, it would meet the needs of all the citizenry, including these groups. Achieving the goal of a more inclusive planning approach required a different outreach model than what we've traditionally used. Traditional outreach efforts have not been particularly successful in obtaining input from minority and/or economically disadvantaged groups. Outreach efforts consisted of an online survey and community conversations with neighborhood and service organizations and targeted focus groups. The overall result of the effort was that we received more public input than we would have expected from traditional efforts and the dialogue was with a broader representation of the community. The survey resulted in almost 400 responses and our community conversations were attended by over 100 participants. Hope responded to Dana Ralph's question that the grant came from CDC and distributed by Department of Health at a total of $120,000. Hope confirmed Dana's reference to the grant funds also funding a healthy food procurement policy for city meetings and policy changes to improve healthy food access to the community. Debbie stated that she is looking forward to seeing the next steps. Jeff stated that the goal in leading up to the March 6 Council Workshop, staff will come back to the committee with a draft prior to the Council Workshop on March 6. Item 3. Parks Infrastructure - Formation of a Citizen Advisory Group - INFO ONLY Jeff Watling reported that last year, Parks staff undertook the task of evaluating all of our large assets and compiling a comprehensive list of the accumulation of needed projects. Park assets are valued at over $10,000 (note: facilities and the golf course were not included in this assessment). Assets were ranked from 1-5, based on physical condition, age, and anticipated useful life remaining. What we found was that a significant percentage of Kent's park assets are nearing, or have reached, the end of their useful life. Kent has 59 parks and they range from the tiny and virtually unknown Eagle Park to the large and hugely popular Lake Meridian Park. The assessment looked at 240 assets in these parks. Of these assets, 32 percent were ranked either "2" ("useful life noticeably in decline") or "1" ("little to no useful life remaining"). A planning level replacement cost for these failing assets was estimated at $16.4 million. Failing assets were not isolated to a few parks. They were found throughout the system. Thirty seven parks (or 63% of the system) contained at least one failing asset. As time continues to pass, the list of failing assets will continue to lengthen. More assets will fail and more areas of more parks may need to be cordoned off due to safety concerns. Areas in parks with abandoned, failed assets will attract unsanctioned activities. The need for a response to the situation will become more obvious. In reviewing the list of parks that contain failing assets, it was staff's determination that the most obvious response to the list which is calling for the replacement of all failed or failing assets may not be the most prudent or desirable response, even if the funding were available. Some of the assets are obsolete and it would not be desirable to try to replace them; and some of the parks containing failing assets would benefit more from a broader renovation. In addition, through the process, staff noted that there are not only failing assets within the system, but entire parks that are not meeting their potential. Any discussion addressing the prioritization of the replacements of failing assets should also consider how to address failing parks. The park system is at a crossroads. Because of the enormity of the need, staff is recommending the formation of a citizen advisory group to work with staff and explore various options. The question of how to respond to our aging park infrastructure is a looming one. Any course of action, even a "do nothing" option, has the potential to impact the system for many years. The resulting advisory group will consist of a broad cross-section of the community, with a good blend of proven leaders to provide some experienced guidance and a new crop of potential community leaders. As important, the majority of the committee would consist of people recommended directly by the community. Because of the complexity of the issue, staff recommends selecting a large group-- of approximately 24 Kent residents. It would be our advice to select approximately one third of them directly, inviting residents with a history of community involvement and leadership, especially in the area of recreation. The remainder of the group will represent specific stakeholder groups, and will be selected to participate by their individual group. Following is an example of the potential make-up of the advisory group: # Type of Organization (3) Organized sports organizations (1 each from football, soccer, and baseball 3 Service clubs 5 Neighborhood organizations 2 School districts 1 Kent Bicycle Advisor Board 1 Trail advocate 1 Friends of Clark Lake 2 Green Kent stewards 2 Kent business community (2) Community organizations (2) Youth organizations (i.e., student councils of KM/Kentridge high schools• scouts 24 TOTAL The citizen advisory group would be tasked with the following responsibilities: • Learn about the Kent park system • Review the park asset report • Establish priorities for addressing the problem • Report findings to the council In order to achieve these tasks, staff recommends a schedule for the group of 8 - 12 meetings with the first meetings to take place in February and to report back to city council in mid-May. An additional component to this report is looking at finances and how these projects can be funded. This challenge presents an opportunity for the community to begin a dialogue on how to address the backlog and prepare the park system for future generations to enjoy. Dana Ralph stated that she is a big supporter of taking care of what we have. She feels the citizen advisory committee is a good idea in order to have a voice from the community and move forward. Elizabeth Albertson was surprised at the decay of some parks. Debbie Ranniger voiced her concern with the recent storm damage and that the list will need to be updated. Dana agreed there is a need to bring up safety issues on the list from the storm damage. Elizabeth Albertson asked that she and Dana go on the asset tour after the weather clears in order to review these findings. Item 4. Walk On: Human Services Commission Amendina KCC 2.53 Ordinance - Adopt Jeff stated that this item comes from the conversation at City council on January 3, in regards to compilation and the makeup of youth on commissions. The need for inclusion for youth on The Human Services Commission was created by council in 1986. It has been determined that youth representatives on the commission should have more flexible term requirements so that each youth representative can remain on the commission throughout the representative's high school career. Dana Ralph moved to recommend council adopt the Ordinance amending KCC 2.53 increasing the terms of appointment for Human Services Commission youth representatives. Elizabeth Albertson seconded. The motion passed 3-0. Item 5. Fourth Ouarter Reports - INFO ONLY • The purchase and transfer of the Municipal Court building from King County was completed. • In recreation, we continue to see increased participation in many programs. • The Christmas Fun Run had a record 2,270 finishers this year. • Within the Youth and the Youth/Teen Division, we initiated a new program with the Federal Way School District, specifically at Totem Middle School and Star Lake Elementary Schools. • Phoenix Academy continues to grow and we continue to work on successful partnerships, for example as with the Boxing Club. There were 5,000 more visits to the center in 2011 than in 2010. • The holiday tree lights were consolidated from both Kaibara Park and Town Square Plaza to just Town Square Plaza this year. • Contributions of cash and in-kind support, less than $5,000 equaled $22,038 for the fourth quarter, with a grand total of just over $75,000 for 2011. • Debbie noted that the Senior Center Lunch Program has received more donations in 2011 than previous years. Debbie Ranniger plans on sharing information on contributions at city council meetings. Item 6. Director's Report - INFO ONLY In 2011, a first and second grade division was added to the youth basket ball league, partnering with local elementary schools that have lower hoops. Twenty plus teams were added to the league. This is the second year for the You Me We event on January 24, 6:00 - 9:30 at ShoWare. This is a fun, free interactive/informative event for youth and families. There will be 40+ agencies participating. Ka BOOM asked us to apply for another grant. We are looking at Green Tree Park as a potential site for this project. In 2011, we received a grant that supported improvements at Tudor Square Park. Jeff distributed a list of work and policy items that he said will require some conversations at future committee meetings. • Planning and Development: Completion of CPPW project. Citizen's Advisory Group - Parks Infrastructure priorities. • Facilities: Interview and hire Facilities Superintendent. RFA negotiations / renewal, Resource Center. • Riverbend Golf Complex: Budget review and discussion with city council. • Park Operations: Park Resource Management Plan. • Human Services: Application cycle for 2013-2014 grant funding. Long-term funding options - Human Services Commission recommendation. • Budget and special projects. • Animal Services contract and shelter options. State Budget. City council retreat. Storm Response Jeff reported that the netting at the Riverbend Golf Complex Driving Range was severely damaged. There is more net damage at Kent Memorial Park and Russell Road Park. Park Operations staff served as a support to Public Works during the clean up, assisting them with clean up of right-of-ways. Upwards of 12 crews have been on the roads dealing with debris clean up and street tree damage. That work will carry on for some time. By the end of this week we will transition some of our work force to deal with park clean up. We ask citizens to support our efforts in cleaning up the parks and if there is an area that is taped off, please respect that and do not enter. Dana Ralph thanked staff for helping with the storm clean up. Debbie Ranniger asked if the city is tallying up the damages and asked what the state is doing. Jeff responded that the Governor is submitting the numbers from the county and the state to the Federal Government for an emergency declaration and getting financial support. The report will show structural damage, costs to clean up. The state declaration is the first step. Debbie asked if there are any monies for temporary jobs to help with the clean up process, inviting the Mayor to join them at the table. Mayor Cooke said she and John Hodgson are talking to Union representatives because we don't hire temp jobs without discussing with them first. With huge amount of damage, in addition to budget cuts and staff cuts, the discussion will continue with union representatives to possibly contract for some assistance. Elizabeth said jobs are up in our state and she is looking to seeing the city's next revenue projections. Debbie referenced utilizing the homeless to assist in the storm clean up. Homeless Assistance Discussion Jeff stated that at the council meeting on January 17, we received a lot of public comment and feedback regarding the proposal from "Kent Hope" and the "Union Gospel Mission. There was a desire by council committee to have a follow up and share next steps. Jeff had numerous discussions regarding this issue with Councilmembers, the Mayor, John Hodgson, and the human services team. Jeff then turned it over to the Mayor for comments. Mayor Cooke said there is always an urgency when people are homeless. We've definitely seen an increase in the homeless largely due to the economy, and partly because we've become a larger city. The Mayor feels there are two major policy issues and one is Homelessness. She asks what the city's role is in setting policy supporting those who are homeless and working with nonprofits and other organizations in support of the homeless. She asked if Council is going to look at this policy development through the eyes of the Human Services Commission, which is the body appointed by the city to develop polices for the homeless and is already networked throughout the region. The other policy is the Resource Center building itself. She feels they are separate, but they can come together. This a big decision to make and she understands there is a need to move on this decision quickly. The city closed the building due to budget constraints. Now we have budgets from the Union Gospel Mission showing how they could operate the building without using city funds. As discussed in meetings she's had with Project Hope and Union Gospel Mission, another concern is the dependency of the city on results from the legislative sessions. The city could lose $10M, if there are decreases in streamline sales tax mitigation fees, annexation sales tax credit fees and the liquor sales tax portion. With the city facing that, she is asking again for the committee to take the time to look at some policies to see how the city should deal with it. Elizabeth asked about housing staff in the Resource building last year and Jeff replied that some staff were housed there during an office renovation. Debbie asked for Jason Johnson and Katherin Johnson from Human Services to participate in the conversation, but they were not at the meeting. She said that the Mayor's points are good. She feels there is tremendous momentum from a number of community groups and she doesn't want to slow it down, but at the same time, there are a number of other groups that have continued to look for ways to utilize the building and we need to consider this an open process. One is to re-open the RFP process. The other thought is to do something on a temporary monthly rental basis, especially with the potential impacts of budget cuts from the state. We need to consider the city's budget condition and should keep our options open. Possibly, the building could be leased for six months to a year in order to make it a useful building. She wants to understand what the larger regional issue is as well. There is no need to duplicate other programs in the area. We need to research other collaborations. Debbie continued saying, the other piece goes to the first policy issue the Mayor brought up. Where does this fit in the larger picture? There are plans to have it be an overnight shelter in the future, so what happens to these folks after 7:00 p.m. until then? She wants to understand what the regional issue is and what other partners are doing. She doesn't want to rush into a solution if we are duplicating other agencies' efforts. She feels it would be important to speak to Human Services staff and educate ourselves on the potential collaboration with other groups involved with assisting the homeless. Elizabeth shared that she has spent nine years working with homeless programs and she is a member of the Seattle - King County Homeless Commission. She feels that gives her a depth of knowledge that might make her look at this with a different lens. For her, where they go at 7:00 p.m. is important, but that doesn't stop her from wanting to provide something from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. She wants to offer the homeless an opportunity to become "ready to benefit," by offering showers, case management, laundry, and storage. Many homeless are veterans. She is very supportive of this project. She feels this has been an un- served population for years and they can only find services in Seattle. That's why some churches have put together programs such as traveling beds, food and shelter. And the city offers some transitional housing and hotel vouchers. Maybe as part of the process, this group could apply for grant funds to get the building ready. She has a lot of faith in the Union Gospel Mission. She is impressed that they believe we have a community group that organized itself well enough that they want to partner with. And she is impressed that the group didn't give up. She was not a part of the RFP process and did not see the proposals and was not a part of the process that said none of them were ready. Without having to send us back to an RFP, if this group wasn't a part of this process, she doesn't feel it is necessary to turn them away at this point. She asked for information on the RFP process. Dana agreed and would like to see specifics of the RFP process. She agrees that human services is all about partnerships. She feels this is a great partnership and she wants to move forward, but the city should do it in a sustainable way. She doesn't want the city to make a commitment and then not be able to fulfill that commitment. It needs to be in a smart and sustainable way. She likes the idea of people having a respite and access to continued education. She appreciates all of the information that has been presented. She wants to know what condition the building is in. She wants to see estimates on costs and see how that fits into the budget. She understands the urgency, but wants to do it right. Elizabeth said that the number one concern is that it's an old building. We wouldn't want to open up the day center and not have heat. We need to know what kind of shape the building is in and, if needed, what would it take to get it ready. She is a fan of using buildings that the taxpayers are already paying for. She supports the city utilizing buildings that are already open - for example partnering with the Kent School District for the Phoenix Academy and the Boxing Club. She receives emails from citizens regarding the homeless sleeping in downtown alleys, while there is an empty building nearby. She asks for help with the numbers to make this work. Debbie asked Jeff for the numbers and next steps. Jeff reiterated what the Mayor said - that there are two sets of policies paths. And, as requested, he can provide the numbers on the RFP. There were eight proposals received and four finalists answered a list of supplemental questions. Representatives from human services agencies, the Chamber of Commerce, and city staff were involved in RFP reviews. No proposal showed a committed budget and that's a risk the city can't afford to take. Jeff reminded the committee that the city has no building allocation within the budget for the Resource Center building. Jeff shared that all of the proposals had great ideas of what they could program in that space. Unfortunately, there were no indications of significant committed funds from any of the four finalist. The review committee recommended not to continue with any of the proposals. Two groups from the RFP group have continued to pursue funding. Jeff then referenced the budget maintenance portion of the Union Gospel proposal. Mike Johnson, Special Projects Director for Union Gospel Mission clarified by saying their facilities budget includes all building maintenance and there is $8,000 budgeted for facilities maintenance and that includes daily use. They ask that the city be responsible for lifecycle projects, such as a new roof. Jeff said that if there is a need for city support, it would make sense as a building owner to have some type of budget or support in the city's budget for maintenance. Debbie said the obvious next step would be to put those numbers together. Mayor Cooke asked that the committee look at the homelessness as a whole. To look at strategic planning and their goals, as well as how is this integrated into the city provisions with a particular provider of services. She applauds this group to have self sufficient services. She asks that they look at the Human Services Commission and Kent Downtown Partnership and the North Park community to be a part of this discussion because this also impacts them. Another option that she spoke to Mike Johnson about was a lease to purchase. She reiterated that we need to look at the city's policy on the homeless in Kent. Debbie asked for next steps from Jeff. Jeff paralleled what has been discussed. The next step is how do we take this proposal and momentum and make sure that it's in context with the sub regional conversation that is happening with human service staff on homelessness in the community. Also, there is a policy decision that needs to be addressed by council in an integrated way. As far as the building's next steps, we need to get an idea on what the budget number would be and how we would pursue it. There is not guarantee but the Human Services Commission funding cycle starts in March and this may be an opportunity to get support through the application process to identify a degree of city support. This again, is lead through the Human Services Commission. Debbie said there are specific questions that this committee and the group need to get answered such as, what happens to their proposal? She agrees we need to have a larger discussion about the policy issue regarding the homeless, and yes, this proposal needs to fit into that larger picture. This group is looking for answers around the building. It seems that the city has some due diligence to do. Can we entertain the lease to own option, and what would that look like? What is the city's piece if we were to open up the RFP process again - not to the eight applicants, but to the four finalists, and what would be involved in doing that? What further information does the city need from this group? She feels that Jeff needs to have some conversations with key players; Pat Gray, Mike Johnson, Katherin Johnson, and Jason Johnson, as well as making contact with the other groups and then come back with options for this committee to see how this fits into the regional picture. Also, find out if the new Renton's veterans center compliments or possibly duplicates this program. We need to look forward on both paths to come to a solution as expeditiously as possible. Elizabeth voiced her frustration. She feels it is obvious that the Mayor is not in favor of this program. She feels the issues raised at the meeting were not cogent to this issue. The Human Services Commission decides how the city is going to spend the 1% of Human Services money. They do not decide what non profits can or cannot operate within the city. She added that the homeless are already here (on the streets) so there is no addressing where they go at 7:00 p.m. Elizabeth asked what are the policies? Adding that policies are nothing more than a bunch of words decided upon by a bunch of people at any given time. She said we are the policy makers and both the council and the committee have the opportunity to make policies. What we are hearing is that we have a group that has valid 501c(3), a budget, and community partners that are asking if our building is available to rent. Since we already rent property, let's rent the building. Let's just come up with a plan to do it. If we need money, we can go to council and tell them how much it is and get a decision. She was upset because for years Kent and South King County have complained that there are no services here and we never get our fair share from the county and now finally we have something and we don't want to do it. Debbie had to interrupt Elizabeth to close the meeting. Debbie said that we need to move forward and find out what the operational support is and make a decision if we want to move forward with this building. Mayor Cooke addressed Elizabeth's comment clarifying that she has never taken the position in opposition. She attended this meeting to ask the questions she has with the representatives when she met with them. Debbie added, that if there is something worth pursuing, we just have to figure out what it needs to be. Dana agreed that we need to see numbers and facts. She wants to make sure building is good for what we are asking. She is excited about the energy and the homework that has been done. She said we need to do the groundwork to make sure it is done smart and it is sustainable. Debbie concluded by saying that they need the numbers, and reaching out appropriately to the community, while potentially reaching out to one of the other RFP groups who has been working behind scenes. We will continue to work on this. The meeting adjourned at 6:35 p.m. Respectfully submitted, re�-i PeCaole Teri Petrole Council Committee Secretary Page 11 KENT ECONOMIC & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES JANUARY 9, 2012 Committee Members Committee Chair Jamie Perry, Deborah Ranniger, Bill Boyce. Councilmember Ranniger called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. in Perry's absence. Perry arrived at 5:50 pm concurring with all motions made. 1. Approval of Minutes Councilmember Boyce Moved and Councilmember Ranniger Seconded a Motion to approve the December 12, 2011 Minutes. Motion PASSED 3-0 with Councilmember Perry's concurrence. 2. City of Kent New Solutions Grant $20,000 December 1,2011-June 30,201 Economic Development Manager Kurt Hanson stated that the City received a United Way King County New Solutions Fund grant for $20,000 that will implement Phase 1 of the East Hill Revitalization Project and fund the expenditures for the consultant Pomegranate Center. He stated that this initiative will be a three-phase approach with the goal of creating and fostering a diverse and thriving neighborhood within Kent's East Hill through community collaboration and leadership development. This first phase will focus on forming a stakeholder's group lead by community leaders and including participants from several City departments. Economic Development Specialist Josh Hall will be the staff liaison and will be working with the Pomegranate Center between January and June 2012 on actionable strategies. The first meeting (a community forum) will be held Saturday, March 2nd at East Hill Elementary School with the intent to identify a key stakeholder group from the participants to help implement Phases II and III. Councilmember Boyce MOVED and Councilmember Ranniger SECONDED a motion to recommend Council authorize the Mayor to accept the United Way King County's New Solutions Grant in the amount of $20,000, amend the budget, and authorize expenditure of the funds in accordance with the grant terms acceptable to the economic and community development director and city attorney. Motion PASSED 3-0 with Council Chamber Jamie Perry's concurrence. 3. Economic Development Report Hanson introduced a "Foreign Trade Zone" (FTZ) Seminar scheduled for January 19th at ShoWare Center sponsored by Port of Seattle, National Association for Industrial and Office Properties (NAIOP), enterpriseSeattle, and Dorsey and Whitney LLP. He stated that a FTZ can be applied to every existing building and greenfield site in King County. He stated that establishment of a FTZ designation would provide industrial centers (businesses who import or export products) with opportunities that could lead to the elimination of customs duties, reducing overall operating costs for these businesses and would add to their success and profitability. Hanson stated that staff has been working with the NAIOP in reaching out to the commercial business ECDC Minutes January 9,2012 Page 1 of 1 community and has promoted this seminar primarily to the aerospace industry and commercial warehouse businesses. Hanson reported that Frank Isernio, CEO and owner of Isernio's Sausage is moving their facility to Kent from South Seattle into a 27,000 square foot facility bringing a minimum of 55 employees to this area. Economic and Community Development (ECD) Director Ben Wolters stated that in the wake of city council's approval of the Midway rezone, Seattle Public Utilities (SPU) is working with Kent on some new market interests. As the metro area becomes denser, SPU has shown an interest in the Kent Highlands landfill site located directly off I-5 offering great visibility. Seeing the market interest perk up, Kent has reached a tentative agreement with SPU to pursue evaluation and development of alternatives for that site. SPU is aware that city council has rezoned that property for a higher level of development and has hired Hartland Real Estate professionals to complete a marketing analysis. Wolters stated that Senior Planner Erin George is researching successful cases of land fill redevelopment elsewhere in the Country similar to ours. Wolters stated that ECD has applied for $400,000 in Environment Protection Agency (EPA) planning grants. The city anticipates receiving a response as to whether Kent's application has been approved somewhere around March to May. Wolters reported that the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) will restart their search at the end of March to relocate their west coast headquarters to house 1800 people as part of a national effort to consolidate FAA facilities into three regional headquarters. The competition will be confined to the original sites of Kent, Des Moines, Renton, Tukwila and Seatac. Wolters states that Kent's original proposal considered the Transit Oriented Development (TOD) in Kent, promoted the downtown area as a promising location, and offered up the Naden site in partnership with Hines and Mortenson construction. A Request for Proposal (RFP) will be issued at the end of March where we will offer the Naden site again. Staff will continue to explore other qualifying sites dependent on what the terms of the competition. The TOD portion from the original RFP will remain and could place Kent in a better competitive position. If Kent were to win the competition, it would be a huge boom for downtown and would provide a boost to Kent's historic downtown and the overall community. After the RFP's are submitted, it will take 60-90 days for a selection to be made. The selection process through design, construction and move-in should be completed by 2016. All sites under consideration will be constrained to within 9 miles of the existing site in Renton due to budget limitations. Wolters stated that the ShoWare Center won accolades in the Daily Journal of Commerce, was picked as the project of the month, highlighting our innovative design and what a great marquee attraction it is. Informational Only Adiournment Committee Chair Perry adjourned the meeting at 6:10 p.m. Pamela Mottram, Secretary Economic &Community Development Committee PIAPlanningAECDC\2012\MlnutesV01-09 12_Mln.doc ECDC Minutes ry Janua 9,2012 Page 2 of 1 1 �••� KENT CITY OF KENT PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES January 10, 2012 COMMITTEE MEMBERS: Les Thomas, Dana Ralph, and Bill Boyce, Chair • The meeting was called to order by Chair Boyce at 5:01 PM. • Chair Boyce called for changes or additions to the agenda. Chair Boyce added one discussion item. 1. Approval of Minutes L. Thomas moved to approve the minutes of the November 8, 2011 meeting. The motion was seconded by D. Ralph and passed 3-0. 2. Washington Traffic Safety Commission grant — ACCEPT and Establish budget Chief of Police Ken Thomas and Research and Development Analyst Debra LeRoy explained the funds will be used to purchase one school zone flashing light assembly for Park Orchard Elementary School. D. Ralph moved to recommend that City Council accept the Washington Traffic Safety Commission grant in the amount of $7,500 and establish the budget. The motion was seconded by L. Thomas and passed 3-0. 3. Washington Auto Theft Prevention Authority grant — ACCEPT and Amend the budget. Chief Thomas and Debra LeRoy explained the additional funds will be used by the PATROL Task Force in its effort to combat auto theft and associated crimes. The grant award is effective January 1, 2012 and expires June 30, 2013. L. Thomas moved to recommend that Council authorize the Kent Police Department to accept the Washington Auto Theft Prevention Authority grant on Behalf of the PATROL Task Force in an amount not to exceed $55,000 and amend the budget. The motion was seconded by D. Ralph and passed 3-0. 4. Police Department Updates — INFO ONLY • Chief Thomas acknowledged and thanked Debra LeRoy for her grant research, development, writing and processing for the Kent Police Department over many years. • Assistant Chief Mike Painter will be retiring from his position on January 31", after nearly 32 years with the Department. Mike will be taking a position with Washington Association of Sheriffs and Police Chiefs in Lacey, WA on February 1st. Chief thanked AC Painter for his leadership and the legacy he leaves at Kent PD. Mike thanked the City of Kent for the opportunity to work here, stating it has been a very good place to work. • Commander Pat Lowery was introduced and will be promoted to Assistant Chief effective February lit, replacing Mike Painter. Pat's duties will include the Investigations Division, various task forces and Public Information Officer. • Commander Tracey Gurr will become the Detective Commander effective February is', as well as the Kent School District liaison. • Assistant Chief Jon Straus will now manage the budget process, as well as the city's jail facility, Records, Evidence, Recruitment, Training departments and other administrative staff. AC Straus has worked with AC Painter over the past year on the department's 2 budget. He stated lateral and entry level police officer testing and oral boards will continue to work to attract a strong diverse pool of applicants. • As the Assistant Chief over the Patrol Division, Randy Bourne's primary mission is to keep the community safe and keep officers safe in order to do their jobs for the community. AC Bourne congratulated the new committee members and welcomed them to ask questions at any time or to do a ride-along. • Chief stated the recruiting officer is working diligently to find qualified and diverse applicants to staff the open police officer positions. • Detective Wayne Himple will retire in February after over 30 years with the Department. • Detective Sgt Brian Jones will retire in March after over 35 years with the Department. • Retirements will result in promotions and lateral moves to fill positions. • The gang task force is comprised of detectives from Auburn, Renton, Kent, Port of Seattle, Department of Homeland Security and King County Metro Police. Kent PD Commander Rafael Padilla will oversee the task force. • Chief will present his Public Safety Report, including several department awards, at the City Council meeting on January 17cn Discussion item: Chair Boyce proposed changing the start time for future Public Safety Committee meetings. The other committee members agreed on 4:30 PM as the new start time effective with next month's meeting on February 14cn The meeting adjourned at 5:35 PM. Jo Thompson, Public Safety Committee Secretary Public Safety Committee Minutes 2 January 10, 2012 SPECIAL PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE Minutes of Monday, January 23, 2012 COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT: Committee Chair Elizabeth Albertson and committee members Dennis Higgins and Dana Ralph were present. The meeting was called to order at 4:05 p.m. Committee Chair Albertson noted that we need to be quick due to a Parks Committee meeting that is scheduled to begin at 5:00 p.m. Public Works Director, Tim Laporte asked that items 10 and 11 be moved up on the agenda to items 2 and 3. Albertson concurred with the changes to the order of the agenda. Item 1— Approval of Minutes Dated November 28, 2011: Higgins MOVED to approve the minutes of November 28, 2011. The motion was SECONDED by Ralph and PASSED 3-0. Item -2 4 — 2012 Water treatment Chemical Contract with JCI Jones Chemicals, Inc: Water Quality Supervisor, Sean Bauer presented an informative PowerPoint presentation highlighting the following: • Why we treat our drinking water • Chemicals used and what each of them do Bauer explained that items -2 4 and 3 5 are similar in nature and that he would be explaining them together, with separate motions. Bauer went on to explain that in order to ensure a consistent cost for annual budget planning for water treatment supplies, the Water Department advertises annually. The use of these chemicals is required to produce drinking water quality that meets state and federal regulations. Gas chlorine is used to disinfect the water supply and protect it from contamination. Liquid Sodium Hydroxide is used in the water system as a pH adjustment for corrosion control. Kent's water sources tend to be slightly acidic; Sodium Hydroxide is added to source water to reduce its natural corrosiveness, which if left untreated would reduce the service life of pipes. This is an annual cost which is planned for each year and the funding comes from the 2012 Water Utility operating budget. Ralph MOVED recommend Council authorize the Mayor to sign the 2012 Water Treatment Chemical Supply Agreement with JCI Jones Chemicals, Inc. for Gas Chlorine and 25% Sodium Hydroxide, in an amount not to exceed $109,450.00, subject to final terms and conditions acceptable to the City Attorney and Public Works Director. The motion was SECONDED by Higgins and PASSED 3-0. Page 1 of 6 SPECIAL PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE Minutes of Monday, January 23, 2012 Item 3 5 - Contract with Cascade Columbia Distribution for Supply of Water Treatment Chemical: As stated in item 4 above, use of these chemicals is required to produce drinking water quality that meets state and federal regulations. Bauer explained that Sodium Fluoride is used to fluoridate the drinking water in an effort to help prevent dental cavities in young children, and Potassium Permanganate is used in the removal of iron and manganese to prevent staining of fixtures (sinks, tubs, etc). Higgins MOVED to recommend Council authorize the Mayor to sign the 2012 Water Treatment Chemical Supply Agreement with Cascade Columbia Distribution for Sodium Fluoride and Potassium Permanganate in an amount not to exceed $29,028.00, subject to final terms and conditions acceptable to the City Attorney and Public Works Director. The motion was SECONDED by Ralph and PASSED 3-0. Item 4 6— Drinkina Water State Revolvina Fund Loan: Water Superintendent, Brad Lake gave an informative PowerPoint Presentation explaining that this project involves the construction of a water filtration plant capable of meeting the federal Long Term Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule requirements of 99% cryptosporidium removal from the Green River water supply, enhancing Kent's ability to use Tacoma SSP Partnership water as needed. Lake went on to explain that Kent entered into the Tacoma Second Supply Pipeline (SSP) partnership in 2002. The addition of the filtration plant is required by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and by contract Kent is responsible for approximately 12 percent of the cost of the roughly $200 million project, which equates to about $20-25 million. This expense was anticipated when the current water rate schedule was adopted by Council in 2009. It was assumed that the project would be financed through a combination of bond sales and/or loans. The loan in question provides a low interest (1.5 percent per annum) alternative to bonds. Ralph MOVED to recommend Council authorize the Mayor to accept the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund Loan in the amount of $2,020,000.00 to fund part of Kent's share in the building of the Tacoma Partnership Second Supply Pipeline Project's new Green River Water Treatment Plant Filtration Facility and establish a budget accordingly, subject to final terms and conditions acceptable to the City Attorney and Public Works Director. The motion was SECONDED by Higgins and PASSED 3-0. Page 2 of 6 SPECIAL PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE Minutes of Monday, January 23, 2012 Item 6 7— Seattle-King County Health Department Local Hazardous Waste Management Program (LHWMP): Conservation Specialist, Gina Hungerford explained that the next three items are related and that all three grants together cover the entire cost of the three events she will be talking about. The first item Hungerford spoke about was the Seattle/King County Health Department's Local Hazardous Waste Management Program Grant is an annual grant to help cities protect public health and the environment from toxic and hazardous products and wastes. The grant covers collection of hazardous waste at three special recycling collection events for residents and one for local businesses, as described in the Grant Agreement Scope of Work. Hazardous items collected at the events include: Refrigerators and freezers, used oil, antifreeze and other petroleum products, as well as batteries. In addition, the grant pays for staffing and printing and mailing cost. Hungerford noted that the City will receive $31,121.55. No match is required. The Local Hazardous Waste Management Program grant fully funds the collection of hazardous waste collected at the four events the City hosts. Committee member Ralph asked why the numbers have gone down on several of the items that are recycled at this event. Environmental Conservation Supervisor, Kelly Peterson stated that so much more is able to be recycled at the curb now without the need for stockpiling the items until the events come around. Higgins MOVED to recommend Council authorize the Mayor to accept the Local Hazardous Waste Management Program Grant in the amount of $31,121.55 for 2012, and establish a budget accordingly, subject to final terms and conditions acceptable to the City Attorney and Public Works Director. The motion was SECONDED by Ralph and PASSED 3-0. Item 6 8 - King County Solid Waste Division Waste Reduction and Recycling WRR : Hungerford explained that the King County WRR grant is used to fund six Special Recycling and Collection Events for residents and businesses for the collection of hard-to-recycle materials, including appliances, electronic equipment, mattresses, Styrofoam, bulky yard debris, concrete, and tires. The grant also funds activities and events associated with the Business Recycling Program, the Multi-Family Recycling Program, the purchase, distribution and promotion of products made from recycled materials, including compost bins and rain barrels, as well as the Christmas Tree Collection and Recycling program co- sponsored by Parks and the Boy Scouts. Page 3 of 6 SPECIAL PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE Minutes of Monday, January 23, 2012 Ralph MOVED to recommend Council authorize the Mayor to accept the Waste Reduction and Recycling Grant in the amount of $178,020.00 for 2012 and 2013, subject to final terms and conditions acceptable to the City Attorney and Public Works Director. The motion was SECONDED by Higgins and PASSED 3-0. Item -7-8-Washington State Department of Ecology Coordinated Prevention Grant (CPG): This item goes hand in hand with items six and seven. As Conservation Specialist, Gina Hungerford earlier explained funding for this grant comes from the Washington State Department of Ecology. King County's allotment is $3,451,168. As a signatory of the County's Solid Waste Comprehensive Plan, cities are eligible for CPG funding. Each city's allotment is based on the percentage of King County's population it represents as calculated by the State Office of Financial Management. For Kent, that allotment came to $125,491. The Coordinated Prevention Grant has historically been a two year grant. But due to budget concerns, the allotted funding is extended only through June 30, 2013. It has not yet been determined whether funding for the remaining two quarters of 2013, will be made available by amendment or whether new 24- month agreements will be established to align with the next biennial calendar (July 1, 2013-June 30, 2015). The CPG grant pays 75% of the "maximum eligible program cost" which for Kent is $167,321.33. A 25% match will be provided by the King County Waste Reduction and Recycling Grant. The CPG funds Residential and Commercial Waste Reduction and Recycling Programs including events for collection of materials hard-to-recycle at the curb: appliances, electronic equipment, mattresses, Styrofoam, bulky yard debris, concrete, and tires. The grant also pays for some event staffing and printing and mailing costs. Hungerford note that the City will receive from the Washington State Department of Ecology $125,491, distributed on a cost basis as tasks are completed. The required 25% match of $41,830.33 will come from the King County Waste Reduction and Recycling Grant. Grant funds will be deposited into the City's Solid Waste Utility fund. Higgins MOVED to recommend Council authorize the Mayor to accept the Coordinated Prevention Grant Contract in the amount of $125,491, subject to final terms and conditions acceptable to the City Attorney and Public Works Director. The motion was SECONDED by Ralph and PASSED 3-0. Page 4 of 6 SPECIAL PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE Minutes of Monday, January 23, 2012 Item 8 10 — Consultant Contract with Olympic Environmental Resources — Special Recycling Programs: Conservation Specialist, Gina Hungerford noted that Olympic Environmental Resources will provide assistance with the implementation of the City of Kent's Waste Reduction and Recycling Programs, including the spring, summer, fall and business special recycling and collection events, outreach for business and multi- family waste reduction and recycling programs, rain barrel and compost bin sales and education to benefit the citizens and businesses of Kent. These programs provide a cost savings to Kent's customers. Kent staff will continue to concentrate on the residential sector. Hungerford noted that this Consultant Contract will be funded 100% through the following grants: Department of Ecology Coordinated Prevention Grant, Seattle- King County Health Department Local Hazardous Waste Management Program Grant, and King County Waste Reduction and Recycling Grant. Ralph MOVED to recommend Council authorize the Mayor to sign a Consultant Services Agreement with Olympic Environmental Resources for Waste Reduction and Recycling Activities and Programs for 2012 in the amount of $83,883.75, subject to final terms and conditions acceptable to the City Attorney and the Public Works Director. The motion was SECONDED by Higgins and PASSED 3-0. Item 911- Stormwater Utility Property Lease: City Engineer, Chad Bieren noted that Valley Corporate Center (VCC) was developed in the 1980s and includes a number of large warehouse/manufacturing properties located along West Valley Highway (68th Avenue South). The city's stormwater utility owns property adjacent to the VCC that was formerly owned by King County Drainage District #1, but is not currently needed for stormwater conveyance. In 1988, the property was paved and leased by the City to VCC to be used as additional parking. VCC paid for the original construction on the City's behalf and signed a lease that ran through 2003. A follow-on lease ran through September 2011. There is no need for another use of this property at this time. The proposed lease is for a five year period, which would enable the City to repurpose the property in the future if needed. Bieren further explained that the lease would be $4,815.23 for 2011/2012 and would increase at 3% per annum through September 2016 (five years total). Higgins MOVED to recommend Council authorize the Mayor to sign an agreement with Alecta Real Estate Kent Valley, LLC to lease stormwater utility property for a period of five years upon the concurrence of the language therein by the Public Works Director and the City Attorney. The motion was SECONDED by Ralph and PASSED 3-0. Page 5 of 6 SPECIAL PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE Minutes of Monday, January 23, 2012 Item 3-G 2 — Information Only/Snow Report: Street Superintendent, Bill Thomas gave an informative PowerPoint Presentation on the Martin Luther King week snow storm providing photos and statistics regarding Kent's response to the snow and ice event. Information Only/No Motion Required Item 34 3 — Information Only/Solid Waste Snow Response: Conservation Specialist, Gina Hungerford briefly explained the impacts that the snow and ice storm had on the collection of solid waste. In summary those residents who did not have their waste collected during the storm may put out twice as much on their normal weekly collection day. Information Only/No Motion Required The meeting was adjourned at 5:00 p.m. Cheryl Viseth Council Committee Recorder Page 6 of 6 SPECIAL PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE Minutes of Monday, January 30, 2012 COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT: Committee Chair Elizabeth Albertson and committee members Dennis Higgins and Dana Ralph were present. The meeting was called to order at 4:04 p.m. Item 1— Approval of Minutes Dated January 23, 2011: Ralph MOVED to approve the minutes of January 23, 2011. The motion was SECONDED by Higgins and PASSED 3-0. Item 2 — Information Only/Transportation Fundina: Senior Transportation Planner, Cathy Mooney and Street Superintendent, Bill Thomas presented an informative PowerPoint presentation titled Annual Asphalt Resurfacing Funding. They explained that this presentation is in preparation for the upcoming Council Workshop on February 7. They touched on the following items: • Overview of Existing Roadway System • Existing Traffic Volumes • Current Condition of Roads • Streets that are Failing • Pavement: Overall Condition Index • Graph depicting Reduced Revenue due to Voter Initiatives • Lane & Strip Patching - used to stretch funds • Transportation Funding • Examples of what are other big Cities are doing • Examples of what our neighboring Cities are doing • Proposed 6 - Year Work Plan for a $20 Vehicle License Fee • Proposed 6 - Year Work Plan for a $40 Vehicle License Fee • Who else has incorporated a Vehicle License Fee since 2008 • Graph depicting most recent Overlay Budget for Other Cities Finance Director, Bob Nachlinger was asked how we fund our street programs. Nachlinger stated that currently the transportation budget is funded from 1/6th of the utility tax or 1% of the 6% and all of the fuel taxes returned to the City by the state. Revenues are placed in the general fund. In 2012 $1.6 million is anticipated in street overlays. Higgins stated that he feels this needs to go to the voters and that he would like the Citizens Committee to provide input prior to Council decisions. Ralph said the Citizen's Committee discussed this earlier in the year. She would like the ongoing Committee to provide input in the decision process, Higgins agreed with Ralph. Ralph went on to say preservation of our assets is the responsibility of the City and that we are accountable to the citizens. Page 1 of 2 SPECIAL PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE Minutes of Monday, January 30, 2012 Mayor, Suzette Cooke addressed the committee briefly and asked committee members to take into consideration who and what cause the most damage to our deteriorating roads and to look at the solution as a regional issue. Information Only/No Motion Required Item 3 — 2012 Work Plan: Public Works Director, Tim LaPorte went over the Street Division 2012 Work Plan. He explained that the street division is comprised of three sections; Street Maintenance, Vegetation Management and Sign and Markings. Information Only/No Motion Required The meeting was adjourned at 5:45 p.m. Cheryl Viseth Council Committee Recorder Page 2 of 2 PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE Minutes of Monday, February 6, 2012 COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT: Committee Chair Elizabeth Albertson and Committee Members Dennis Higgins were present. Dana Ralph, was absent due to a previously scheduled conference. The meeting was called to order at 4:10 p.m. Albertson noted that she had Ralph's concurrence on all action items. Item 1— Approval of Special Meeting Minutes Dated January 30, 2012: Higgins MOVED to approve the minutes of January 30, 2012. The motion was SECONDED by Albertson and PASSED 3-0, with Ralph's concurrence. Item 2 — Contract/Day Wireless Systems — Replacement and Installation of VHF Radio Antenna System: Fleet Superintendent, Ron Green presented an informative PowerPoint presentation. He explained that the project involves the replacement of the VHF Emergency Radio antennas, RF cables and related site improvements located on the City of Kent's Water Tank #5 near James and 98th Street. Replacement was planned for early 2012 due to the mandated VHF Narrow-banding by the FCC (Federal Communication Commission). In addition, equipment age and our recent inclement weather have played a role in the loss of reception and transmission performance (range has gone from 25 miles to 2 miles). Three contractors' bids were received. Of those, Day Wireless Systems was chosen. Higgins MOVED to recommend Council authorize the Mayor to sign a consultant services agreement with Day Wireless Systems in an amount not to exceed $22,606.82 for the replacement and installation of radio antennas and cables on Water Tank #5 near James and 98th Street subject to final terms and conditions acceptable to the City Attorney and Public Works Director. The motion was SECONDED by Albertson and PASSED 3-0, with Ralph's concurrence. Item 3 — Contract/Geo Engineers Inc. — Guiberson Reservoir Replacement — Geotech n ical Investigation: Design Engineering Supervisor, Ken Langholz presented an informative PowerPoint presentation showing the current condition of the approximately 70-year-old reservoir. He went on to note that the Guiberson Reservoir needs to be replaced. Geo Engineers, Inc. was selected to perform geotechnical investigations for the new reservoir. The information gathered by this consultant will be used by the tank consultant to design the foundation of the new tank. Higgins MOVED to recommend Council authorize the Mayor to sign a Consultant Services Agreement with Geo Engineers, Inc. for geotechnical investigations engineering for the Guiberson Reservoir Replacement in an amount not to exceed $17,080, subject to final terms and conditions acceptable to the City Attorney and Public Works Director. The motion was SECONDED by Albertson and PASSED 3-0, with Ralph's concurrence. Page 1 of 3 PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE Minutes of Monday, February 6, 2012 Item 4 — Convey an Access Easement to Puget Sound Enerciv (PSE) — Horseshoe Bend Levee: City Engineer, Chad Bieren showed several aerial photos of the area. He noted that as part of the Horseshoe Bend Levee certification, the City constructed a secondary levee along 80th Avenue S currently there is an opening in the secondary levee at PSE;s gas facility. When complete, the new levee will permanently block off the existing access to the Puget Sound Energy (PSE) Natural Gas Limit Station on 80th Avenue S. The City has been working closely with PSE on aspects related to this work, including provisions for new access to the Gas Limit Station from the south, through City owned property. As shown on the attached drawing, the proposed easement would replace PSE access to its facilities. A portion of the new secondary levee will be constructed on PSE property and will require special design and construction considerations to avoid PSE gas facilities. This work will include construction of a small retaining wall, modified security fencing, updated lighting and stormwater detention. These measures will allow PSE and the City to leave the gas facility in place without constructing more costly, on- site modifications. Higgins MOVED to recommend Council authorize the Mayor to sign an easement allowing Puget Sound Energy access through City property to its Natural Gas Limit Station at the Horseshoe Bend Levee, subject to a final agreement with terms and conditions acceptable to the City Attorney and Public Works Director. The motion was SECONDED by Albertson and PASSED 3-0, with Ralph's concurrence. Item 5 — Puget Sound Energv (PSE) — Easement City Engineer, Chad Bieren displayed a site map and explained that based on increasing demand for electricity, Puget Sound Energy (PSE) is developing a new power substation in Tukwila, on the west side of the Green River. A new, overhead power line route will be constructed later this year in order to meet this demand and provide increased reliability for its system serving Kent. The new lines will connect the new Tukwila substation with the existing Boeing substation, which is located in Kent. Bieren went on to note that this partial release of easement will allow PSE to construct aerial power lines over the corner of a "No Build" easement that was originally granted by a developer to the city (the pole does not affect the no-build easement). The easement was originally granted to provide vehicle access to the property. Higgins MOVED to recommend Council authorize the Mayor to sign a partial release of easement allowing Puget Sound Energy to place overhead facilities subject to final terms and conditions acceptable to the City Attorney and Public Works Director. The motion was SECONDED by Albertson and PASSED 3-0, with Ralph's concurrence. Page 2 of 3 PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE Minutes of Monday, February 6, 2012 Item 6 — 256th Street - Grant: Public Works Director, Tim LaPorte stated that in 2007 the City of Kent received a $2,000,000 grant from the Transportation Improvement Board (TIB) for the subject project. This project would widen SE 256th Street from two to three lanes; provide curb gutter and sidewalks, planters, street trees, street luminaires and bicycle lanes. Because of the age of the grant, the TIB has requested affirmative steps toward project completion or the grant must be returned. It is doubtful whether or not we could reapply in subsequent years without demonstrating a commitment to build it. The TIB has partnered with the City on many projects over the past two decades. The project is not fully funded, although drainage funds and transportation impact fees have been allocated to the project. The remainder of the funds would have to be allocated over a two year period which is the estimated period of construction. Information Only/No Motion Required Item 7 — 2012 Work Plan: This item was removed from the agenda, but will be heard at a later date. The meeting was adjourned at 4:37 p.m. Cheryl Viseth Council Committee Recorder Page 3 of 3 EXECUTIVE SESSION ACTION AFTER EXECUTIVE SESSION